I’ve read that this site is much friendlier towards those who seek the truth about controversial things than Daily Kos. Nothing like testing it right off the bat.
My name is John Dean, from Santa Ana, California. I am a real person, and I will not be silenced. Former MSgt in the Air Force from 1976-1992, I spend most of my time online researching trolls, defending Bev Harris whom I consider to be a hero and have proven is a target of a malicious campaign to discredit, and playing fantasy baseball.
Contrary to what trolls such as Tlh lib, Avila and Vgebert have posted at Daily Kos, I have never, ever, called someone’s place of employment. That’s just one of many things these assholes have put out there recently, in their attempt to dilute my research and efforts by diluting me. After all, they’re worried now – my efforts to uncover what is going on with the anti-Bev movement are bearing fruit, and more and more folks, even at Daily Kos, are speaking out against the bashers and their total lack of real evidence.
This diary by Bev Harris is a perfect example…the tide is turning, and the trolls are starting to become unglued. But they haven’t seen nothing yet 😉
Bev Harris really is a hero, and proof that even one real person can make a difference. I had planned to write my first diary here as a summary of what she has done, and what the trolls have been up to…however, I noticed something rather cute a few minutes ago, and have decided to reveal it as an example of the complexity in dealing with the entire Bev Harris story.
Is the far-left wing really anti-Bev Harris like the right wing? Or is the far-left infiltrated by right wing trolls pretending to be lefties? Perhaps both?
A topic for a good debate I’m sure, just as the topic of whether we should spend some of our time trying to impeach George Bush while faced with a Congress that would never impeach him in a million years. Please note that some who on the surface (the screenname Avila, for example) are involved in this effort…AN EFFORT THAT CANNOT POSSIBLY SUCCEED IF WE DO NOT TAKE BACK THE CONGRESS THIS YEAR, just happen to be anti-Bev Harris trolls. I believe they are right wing trolls. I believe they want us to waste our time on projects that cannot be successful.
Yes, George Bush is evil. Yes, the machines can cheat. Anti-BBV folks who want us to waste our time on trying to impeach Bush while faced with a right wing Congress that would never, ever, impeach him, are trolls IMO.
NOW FOR SOMETHING CUTE
Please see what my eyes see…
- I’m sure many folks are aware of the screenname Meteor Blades at Daily Kos. What many people might not be aware of though is that Meteor Blades is one of the anonymous screennames (with a hotmail email) behind the scenes in the anti-Bev Harris campaign.
- In this diary by Bev Harris, a macho-sounding poster by the name of RedDan challenges Bev Harris. Now this all by itself is cute – RedDan has a gmail email account, and he lists his homepage as http://www.isreview.org/, the homepage of the International Socialist Review. Maybe that really is RedDan’s homepage, but I believe it’s more likely that RedDan is another right wing troll, and the linkage to “isreview” is meant to discredit Daily Kos, Dems, etc. After all, why would someone on the far-left be so anti Bev Harris? So anti-BBV research? One would think that a far-lefty would embrace BBV research since the machines most like were used to cheat and put Bush in the White House, instead of post statements like “Until you can do that, you have NO evidence, NO proof, and NO case to make.” to Bev Harris.
- Now notice who is handing out 4s to RedDan – there’s tlh lib, who says she is from Tallahassee, but also says she is from southern Georgia. And there’s OCD is Funny, another troll who only posts anti-Bev comments. And there’s Meteor Blades!
- This morning, Meteor Blades posted this diary at 1:13:16 AM PST. Look at the very first comment…
- At 1:13:48 PST, only 32 seconds later, the anonymous screenname Miss Blue posted a comment. Searching on Miss Blue’s reveals that this supposedly Wisconsin gal just happened to be up at 1:13 AM PST, and made her very first and only post for the (approximately) past 12 hours in Meteor Blades’ diary, of all places – according to the evidence, we are supposed to believe that Miss Blue read the diary, typed a comment, and posted it in just 32 seconds.
Now personally, I find this all sort of funny, but it’s also alarming – another anti-BBV person, cleverly behind the scenes of the effort to malign Bev Harris, posts a diary and then turns around and uses a sockpuppet apparently to post a comment 32 seconds later.
Anyone can post an anti-George Bush diary. Lots of anonymous screennames post them.
But just wtf are these people?
Thanks for reading,
John
Maybe I missed something in your diary but are you really calling meteor Blades a troll? He is a well respected member of both communities. So I don’t get it? Are you saying because someone disagrees with you they are a troll? Just asking so I am clear on your point?
Ditto the comment re. Avila — she doesn’t (or didn’t — don’t know, since I haven’t seen her around much lately) post as much as Meteor Blades, but her writing around human rights issues is both incisive and excellent.
This seems a little odd to me.
I have 3 fantasy baseball drafts today starting at 1 PM my time, but I’ll be back and lay out the case tonight.
John
Let’s look at the evidence regarding Avila, a screenname I didn’t even know existed until December 18th, 2005, when she posted Kos, please remove the diarist, too in the 2nd part of my recent series of diaries on Bev Harris.
In other words, she started something.
1. Avila went on to post something about not bringing DU stuff to Kos, and then AnnArborBlue took up the mantle and posted this: “outing people who want to remain anonymous is despicable. No matter what. That’s what’s being said here.”
I challenged that comment by bringing up Jeff Gannon, and boxed AnnArborBlue into silence with this post.
DHinMI also showed up, and tag-teamed a little with EasternOkie, who took over the mantle and worked hard to hijack the diary. In the end, it was David Allen’s appearance as plan9pub that was the highlight of the diary.
Wow, what timing…”DailyKos is undergoing some maintenance right now. It’ll be back up just as soon as possible. Thanks for your patience.”
I guess I’ll pick this back up later tonight or tomorrow, with Avila’s second “Delete the diarist” comment followed by ever-increasing troublemaking.
John
Number of requests so far for scans of scary letters that scam our seniors…0.
Number of folks so far who have visited the link I posted and listened to the audio of the Bev Harris – Randi Rhodes incident on 12/14/04…0.
Now that I got that out of my system…
This link is convincing evidence that both tlh lib and Avila are trolls at Daily Kos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/3/13/25010/9691
The diary never mentions Bev Harris, never links to Bev Harris, has nothing to do specifically with Bev Harris, and yet it is being trolled.
See for yourself.
If you care.
John
The fact that someone honestly disagrees with someone else is irrelevant.
But I do find this odd, and I’ll simplify it…
RedDan has a gmail account, and claims the International Socialist Review is his homepage. Obviously, the ISR link could being discredit upon mainstream Dems, if RedDan was actively involved in things instead of being an anonymous screenname.
RedDan, supposedly a far-lefty, comes into Bev’s diary, shows an anti-BBV research attitude, and issues a challenge to Bev, wanting her to hack an election (and go to jail and silence herself?).
Meteor Blades gives the comment a 4, as do proven trolls such as tlh lib and OCD is Funny.
Meteor Blades posts a diary, and 32 seconds later, a screenname by the name of Miss Blue (sounds sort of like the Liberal US Marine) has already read the diary and posts a comment.
Miss Blue hadn’t posted for 12 hours, supposedly is in Wisconsin and awake at 1:13 AM PST, is an apparent speed reader and typist.
I just find this all odd. Don’t you?
John
Actually that is the same thing you wrote in your diary, so nothing new has been added to the dialogue. I live on the west coast and post in the middle of the night all the time. I wake up at 1am and can not get back to sleep.
Did you cross post this at Dkos? That is the Booman rule if you are going to post anything about Dkos. Otherwise it can not be posted here. I do have that right don’t I folks?
For all sorts of reasons I’m not going to comment on RedDan.
And I find it ridiculous to label MB a troll. Ludicrous even. Same goes for Avila.
Re. your ‘observations,’ 1.13a.m. doesn’t strike me as an unusual time to be posting at all — I certainly often find myself reading and writing at that time of night? Does that make me a troll? Or a front? If it’s Meteor’s most recent diary over there that you’re referring too — I’d also point out that it is short, as is Miss Blues comment. I don’t find it strains credulity to imagine she catches it as soon as it arrives, skim reads and posts a brief comment.
I think you’re investing way too much in the reliability of the time stamps: I mean here we have one where the first few comments apparently predate the posting of the diary.
At least some of the time, I’m a fan of parsimony in my theorising.
is, I believe, 3:13am Central (Wisconsin) time. Not that unusual to be up posting — say you’ve got a baby and you just got them back down to bed after the early morning feeding. Or you just came home from a night on the town, changed into your PJs, and wanted to check the latest scoop on the blogs before hitting the hay.
I’ve had to get up at 4 to 5am this past week to take some medication, and I figure as long as I’m up I might as well check in on BooTrib.
Not everyone is in bed by 10 and up at 6 (though some of us should be…). Don’t judge much by the time stamps…
not Nancy here.
You’ve got your panties in a wad over nothing. For instance, posts I make from the EST zone post to this blog in DST. Knowing this, I wouldn’t make a case for or against anybody based on their posting times. Nor would I rush to sit in judgment as to when people are allowed to be awake of asleep in order to escape your suspicion of them.
If you’re on a crusade, you’re entitled. But try carrying it out in the manner of Don Quixote rather than as a jackbooted stormtrooper-type.
The possibilities for deception on the internet are as numerous as the motives to pursue those methods of manipulation.
Just speaking in general terms of these blogs and forums, accounts are not secure. Multiple users can also share accounts and post under the same name. Political agendas are not the only beneficiary for deceptive behaviors.
about the MO of the proverbial troll….
I do believe that if I were to become a troll on a wingnut site, I would first build up a credible persona by posting diaries and comments that were well in line with whatever the site in question would consider “normal” or perhaps even “insightful”. Then I would pick out a crucial issue to my side and troll the hell out of anybody that tried to do meaningful work on that issue. It seems to me that would be the most effective to way gain cover and still do ‘useful’ troll-work.
Without drawing any particular conclusions about any particular users mentioned above, I think that it is entirely possible that trolls exist and that they are attempting to debunk all efforts to get rid of electronic voting machines or to make them transparent. After all, it is probably THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE OF OUR TIME, because whoever owns the knowledge of the inner workings of the machines can “stuff the ballot boxes” and leave no trace. I am a computer programmer and I KNOW that it would be VERY EASY to do so.
someone tried that several months ago — but I don’t remember who. It didn’t work, if I recall; people around here aren’t that easily swayed (unlike Mr. and Mrs. Middle America, but I digress).
I do seem to get the feeling in this diary that “if you disagree with me, you’re a troll” — that’s just like those who say that if you disagree with the war you’re in league with Al-Qaeda, or if you believe in the separation of Church and State you’re persecuting Christians, or if you believe in equal justice under Law you’re soft on crime.
Maybe we need to separate the person from the message — I know that there have been questions about Harris’ actions and accountability within her organization (I really don’t know enough about the situation to make a judgement), but it doesn’t mean that there is no tampering, or potential for tampering, with electronic voting machines. I’ve been involved with computers for almost 13 years (and studied Fortran way back in the late 1970s); I know how programs can be manipulated to produce the result you want. Yet at the same time, as an occasional disabled rights activist (something I need to get back into), I can understand the need for ways that the visually impaired can register their votes independently; sure, you can tell someone your choices and have them mark a ballot, but how can you be sure they’re not ignoring you and making their own choices? It’s a quandry…
Anyway, if you (John) are truly interested in contributing to the discussions here, or even if you just want to kick back and relax once in a while, welcome. But if all you plan to do is attack folks who aren’t even here to defend themselves, or brand those who have honest questions or disagreements as “trolls”, well, you’ll probably find your readership dropping…
As a long time troll hunter at DailyKos I’m a little confused by this diary.
There are lots of long time diarists and commenters there that have extremely strong opinions and are not shy about posting them. Meteor Blades might periodically make a comment that is outrageous but no troll.
What I have learned is to read the entire diary and comment thread in context. As comments get heated people say things that are totally out of line. These are not trolls. Without reading the diary and the comments it would be hard to say. I’m not sure how long you’ve been at the orange site…but after 2 years I’ve learned a lot of people just get short tempered. Go back and read the Ohio diaries after 11/04 if you want trolls and anger.
Trolls are there with the sole intent of hijacking a diary, creating a disruptive atmosphere, failing to address issues by just throwing out bigoted comments, or personal attacks.
Another item – as a general rule we leave the orange site discussions at the orange site.
Each environment has it’s own population and culture. Ours is a listening and discussig culture. We have our internal struggles but without the vitriol.
All of my comments are on the subject in general and it’s consideration on internet forums.
How would you classify the few positive manipulating but deceptive posters that exist? They aren’t trolls by the classic sense, but their behavior to influence conversation is just as effective.
They know that they are right and everyone who disagrees is an idiot — and they have to bring everyone to their side. Sort of like the Christian Reich in a way…
Yeah, but what about others? For instance, a dedicated right winger that comes to a progressive site and posts what appear to be positive messages but they are indirectly supporting a conservative or nonprogressive cause? As a way to shoot down support of a controversial issue or gain an illegitimate edge within the dem/progressive party? An apparent positive message can also effectively divide a community.
It is clearly stated that that site is a progressive community. Don’t like it deal with it.
I have yet to see more than a few right wing commenters stay on message without getting trollish. There are probably a dozen that have been around for a year or more. And even they periodically go off on a tangent and get troll rated.
I still don’t understand why this diary is at Booman.
Is there some intent to disrupt this community with a DailyKos argument?
Why has the diarist failed to come back and comment?
Sounds like the beginnings of a troll on our own site.
I wouldn’t see any problem in deleting the diary…just my opinion. I thought it was a good chance to discuss the subject without getting into specific personal circumstances regarding posters or sites.
My comments are on the subject in general.
I’m trying to find out what the opinion is of being manipulated and recognizing trollish behavior that doesn’t fit the normal definitions.
so forgive me if I bring in a bit of the Bible that fits.
Christians are told to “test the spirits”, and I think that can apply to liberal/progressive blogs as well. We can look back at a person’s posting history — are they all of a sudden taking a stand on some issue? And how does that issue fit into the liberal/progressive agenda? Does it pass the “smell” test? (One of my oppositions to the Dubai deal was that it just didn’t “smell right” — and it wasn’t just because it was an Arab country, though that’s how the MSM portrayed it.)
I think that if we hold fast to our beliefs, our principles, we’re not going to be that easily swayed. And it’s more likely that we’ll turn that dedicated wingnut into at least a moderate… 🙂
One of the problems with the Democrats’ move to the right is that they’re not hanging on to their core principles, and thus can be swayed into putting up more DINOs like Casey and continuing to bankroll folks like Lieberman.
Does it pass the “smell” test? (One of my oppositions to the Dubai deal was that it just didn’t “smell right” —
Things like this catch my attention too. I like everybody here so it’s not a personal difference but I dislike the feeling that I might be getting used or manipulated. I don’t have any problems in compromise for a greater common good but I don’t care for deception. If individuals or groups have to switch a position on an issue(s, then the best thing to do is be honest about it. The problems we face are so complicated that an unrelenting position isn’t usually realistic.
For instance, many progressives are finding themselves aligned with neocons to further the business viability of alternative energy. That can come across as a skewed position if it’s not openly addressed or admitted.
When well stated are part of the premise of an open forum. Yes there are lots of opposing opinions on DailyKos…and in many respects it has divided into mini-communities.
As long as comments are to continue the discussion – especially when counter to the diary – they are welcome there. I usually just stay out of rating those. A difference of opinion is not a troll.
Bigoted comments for purposes of disruption of a thread are trolls.
That was not my experience there. If you contradicted someone important there, they come down on you as a ton of bricks.
The discussion was about cheney’s visit to Auschwitz i believe, and he said that they had survived terrorism. I argued that yes they had survived terrorism, A Terrorist State. Quoted Noam Chomsky, Wikipedia, and in there there was a quote from Spanish judge Baltasar Garzon. I was told that those I used as a quote were wrong. I was told that I was using parabols, etc etc.Then of course the raings.
If you really want a place that enjoys discussion you can find it here
First, welcome to the community. You might check out the FroggyBottom Cafe and introduce yourself.
The community’s “Golden Rule” is don’t be a prick. Many people here take that to a higher standard: be kind.
Second, the requirement for critiquing/criticizing another site is that the diary be cross-posted.
Your diary is a bit different in that you are accusing specific individuals of being trolls. I wonder at both the appropriateness of doing such a thing and the value.
There are folks at this site who can explain the format of logical arguments. You have set up one of those “prove your not” kind of arguments. These kind of arguments tend to go round and round – no resolution.
Third, your opinion on the value of pushing for impeachment might very well be met with opposition here. If you search both BooMan and front-pager, StevenD, you will find they are very supportive of pushing for impeachment. StevenD even suggested that “Impeach Him” become the Dems rallying cry for the coming elections.
Fourth, a general discussion on trolls might be interesting. Others in the comments have begun such a discussion.
Finally, I am glad you are passionate about the voting process. Please consider posting diaries that will inform us and offer us actions we might take. Thanks.
is not some anonymous screen name. Anyone who cares to know his real identity can certainly find it out.
He is about the least likely right-wing troll I can think of.
Even DHinMI is not a right-wing troll. Although he certainly manages to act like one a good percentage of the time.
Real right-wing trolls have a much different MO. They consistently try to paint the Dem Party as not one whit different than the Republican Party as a way to promote apathy or third-parties.
And the problem with identifying them is that many non-trolls make the same arguments, and the arguments are not wholly without merit.
Real trolls know how to disrupt a community by using acceptable language.
The best way to detect them is to look closely at their posting choices. They will ignore all non-controversial threads, but will constantly post in threads where they can cause or inflame controversy.
The best way to detect them is to look closely at their posting choices. They will ignore all non-controversial threads, but will constantly post in threads where they can cause or inflame controversy.
How can you make such a blanket generalization like this? There are plenty of reasons why peoploe don’t post in threads. A controversial thread might not appear to be such at first look, but any dissenting opinion can turn it into one.
Simply because one doesn’t engage in those threads doesn’t make them a troll. Labeling them a troll for that behavior can be harmfull and untrue.
A good look at posting history is beneficial and many factors should be considered. Multiple screen-names by a poster is another factor.
How can I say it?
Because it is true.
There is only only one way to distinguish a troll from a person that truly believes that there isn’t a whit of difference between how Bill Clinton ran this country and how Bush does. And that is to look and see if they bother to post in diaries about music, food, movies, dogs, cats, non-partisan threads, etc..
The one weakness of the troll is that they don’t bother to engage in the community, they don’t care about the people in the community. They’d never offer someone a hug, or console someone, or offer them non-political advice.
They will scan the site looking for a way to eviscerate the Dems, to point out how they are ineffectual, or they are selling out, and then they will seize on that, perhaps even post a diary about it, and sit back and watch as people pour in to heap abuse on the Dems.
The problem is, Dems really do act spineless, so even I will post diaries of this type.
The only way to spot a troll is by what they DON’T post about.
The one weakness of the troll is that they don’t bother to engage in the community, they don’t care about the people in the community. They’d never offer someone a hug, or console someone, or offer them non-political advice.
After some of the altercations I’ve seen that were spawned by subtle misunderstandings, there comes a need to self-censor in any of those threads. Any misunderstanding can be damaging and it’s easier to avoid them than it is to to correct them.
are you saying that there are altercations in the Cafe, in Thursday blogging, in Friday night JazzFest, in open threads, in diaries about what a schmuck Bush is?
A troll is not interested in those diaries and will not post in them.
A troll will scan the site until they find one of two things.
And that is ALL they will do.
You will never see them engage in any other comments. Nothing neutral, nothing friendly, nothing that is agendaless.
Always, they will have message discipline. Sometimes the message discipline alone will give them away.
And most of them have been banned from 1,2,3, or 4 or more community sites before they show up here.
The most clever of them actually do make friends. But most of them don’t have the time or the inclination.
And they hide behind free speech to avoid being banned.
I think you are too narrow in the scope and ability in trollish behavior or the definition of a troll is still unclear. Many posters do not develop personal relationships in internet communities for a variety of reasons. It doesn’t automatically make us trolls. I’ve seen differences of opinion or misunderstandings carry over from one diary into several others and the piling on behavior supported by friends of the more popular one. That still doesn’t make anyone a troll but it helps explain one reason why relationships aren’t developed. To form a definitive opinion of a poster based on your prejudice or opinion, as a site proprietor, is damaging to the community.
why is it that you seem to think that I am calling you a troll, rumi? I never implied that, and I find your reaction curious.
I know a troll when I see one. And I am telling you how to see them too.
What is damaging to the community is the presence of trolls, not when the proprietor points out how they operate.
People that do not engage in the personal stuff are not necessarily trolls. I laid out several tell-tale signs, and lack of engagement in personal stuff is only one of them.
There are many members of this site that consider themselves greens or independents, and are harshly critical of the Dem Party. But, they are in no way trolls. You can tell that because they have more focus than just how bad and useless the Dems are. They enjoy the site in all its variety and they make many other points than just to tear down the Dems and poo-poo anyone stupid enough to work within the party.
Other people have no interest in the community aspects, but are purely interested in an exchange of ideas. But you can tell they are not trolls because their comments are varied, often constructive, and are not single-mindedly aimed at promoting apathy and/or disgust with the Dems.
It is only when all of the features I mentioned are combined that you can identify a GOP operative. And even then, banning them will cause a good number of people to complain about double standards and censorship.
Trolling for Rove is a job for professionals. They are not easily spotted. But they can be spotted.
I could be wrong but I think this last comment is the first time you said …when all of the features mentioned are combined… and that changes the perception of your previous claims. Up until now, it appeared that any of the traits on their own is how you identify a troll. I happen to have some of those traits and that’s why I took a position to defend myself. That’s all.
What I meant before about too narrow a definition is that you seem to identify a troll with an obvious GOP or anti-site foundation. I don’t agree with that. I think the particular interests behind a troll’s motive can vary greatly and actually even look to be in agreement with the site philosophy.
yes. Anyone can just be an idiot and act like a troll. But the professional troll are the only ones worth worrying about. I’ve banned fly-by posters without anyone caring or even noticing. But a good troll will make sure that banning them is more painful than letting them do their thing.
And that is the whole point. Ultimately they WANT to be banned. But they want their banning to cause disruption in the blog community. If they fail to do this, they have wasted their time.
So, the absolute key is to gain allies. But generally speaking, they will not waste time making false friends. They will stick to ideas.
The other type of troll is the one that posts toxic ultra-lefty stuff to try to make the site look bad for tolerating it. That way they can point to the communities tolerance for extreme anti-American rhetoric as a way to dismiss everything else on the site.
By the way, these tactics have been used for at least 100 years. The New Republic was created as a false flag magazine of the left to support the United States entry into the first world war and the subsequent League of Nations effort. It was funded by international business interests that were not aligned with the left in this country. Not much has changed in the interim, either.
In addition to those examples are some that aren’t trolls because they’re agreeable manipulation? Posters who have more than one screen-name that’s used to give the impression of greater support for a particular idea? Posters who appear to be in agreement but subtly sabotage a greater goal by manipulation? Ones who diminish opposing ideas by using positions of community status to cast doubts on a dissenter in misdirection?
What would be the name for those types of behavior?
encountered more than one or two examples of someone using multiple screen names.
As for DHinMI and AnnArborBlue, there is nothing secret about what they do. They are anti-conspiracy police. They exist to protect the site from marginalizing itself by tolerating theories that would make it uncomfortable for a person like John Kerry to post diaries there.
They are enforcers and they have a purpose. Personally, I think they are assholes. But, I don’t dispute that they serve a useful purpose and help keep Daily Kos from becoming an embarrasment to mainstream politicians.
The thing is, they are not doing it to serve the right, they are doing it to protect the community’s influence.
If I thought they went about it in a sensible way I would never have created this site.
for giving a place to post to decent people for whom mainstream politicians are an embarrassment.
Jump to the end
Booman, say we are having someone who fits this profile here… how do you handle it? How long do you tolerate it, where do you draw the line?
I recently wasted four hours tracking down one of these troll types… and I wish I hadn’t. The only information I gained is that I was not the only one who had been attacked and that better people than myself had been broadly attacked and offended… and the poster was banned on several sites for serial posting abuse.
So I learned, (again), not to take things personally, and not to give my time and energy to what is just a black hole. From past experience I found that when the “editorial board” (or diary cops) came down on me it was because I was being sloppy with my sources or links, or just bad writing… so I set about to improve myself and my writing.
This community is really special…. and I value the people here. It is upsetting to see it happen, and to see people get sucked into it, or alienated by it.
Divisiveness is a big problem in politics. Not progressive…. a terrible loss to positive forward motion.
Dunno. What do you do?
If they are good, I just have to tolerate it. If they are not good banning them will not be seen as a grave offense by the community.
I am only telling people this so they can have a heightened awareness.
If I ban a long-time user for being a troll, it will be because I have concluded they fit the profile I have laid out. But, I still might not ban them if I think the banning will be more disruptive than their continued antics.
By laying out my views on what I see as their methods I am hoping to have more latitude if I need to act.
But, the important thing is that people understand that free speech is not an absolute on the site. I won’t tolerate O’Reilly talking points for a moment. I lay out my guidelines in the FAQ.
Be respectful, respect that this site is about improving the Dem Party and winning elections. If you see someone that is consistently negative about the Dem Party, never criticizes the GOP unless it is to compare it to the Dems, that never has anything uplifting or constructive to say, that never bothers to deal with other members as human beings, never has any other interests that purely political ones…if someone fits all of those categories? They are a troll, and members should call them on it so I don’t have to take all the heat for it.
but any human endeavor eventually becomes something greater than the sum of its parts.
And there are certainly people here who are ardent devotees of Democratic party politicians, they send them money, they work for them for free, and some can even tell one from another.
And there are people here who feel very strongly about winning US “elections.” Some are under no illusions about what would be “won,” others are.
But on the whole, the impression I get is that most of the people who post here are motivated by a desire to see a better world, a chance for a future, and especially a future for their descendants.
I think the site may have been subverted by people whose opposition to crimes against humanity, for example, or subjugation of women, or corporate rule in general, would not be altered even if a Democrat were installed as symbolic figurehead and presented the policies in more palatable terms without even using an earpiece.
there are also people here that are actively engaged in changing the party by running for office, by supporting insurgents that are running for office, and so on.
They may be no more satisfied with the Dem Party than you are, but they choose to work within it.
All I ask is that their efforts are not constantly belittled. Personally, if all our members held office or important positions as delegates, or other leadership positions, we would all have less of a problem with the Dem Party.
And, you know I tolerate all kinds of dissent, even from grizzled terrorists, and even engage in much of it myself.
to the politicians, in fact, I have recently seen a couple of indicationettes that you yourself might be progressing into that happy realm. A sign of growth?
A whisper of hope? Maybe. Or maybe just a momentary bout of indigestion. We will see.
I liked Boston Joe’s diary about people learning about their communities, its needs, attitudes of the people about those needs, more education than anything else, and something that both corporate rule entusiasts as well as those subversives whining about their own selfish need for medicine and a future for their kids could participate in.
I liked that inclusiveness. And also that the main thrust, whether Joe intended it this way or not, would be education – an education for the participants – to learn not only what the needs in their community are, but how the people who live there feel about fixing them. Non partisan ballot initiatives. Feasibility inquiries. Very inclusive.
Now that of course was my interpretation. I’m sure devotees of the rich men in the pretty suits would see it as a terrific opportunity to persuade more of their neighbors to send money to their favorite, which is going to happen anyway, whereas the non partisan other stuff might not.
Yesterday, in Chicago, I understand that a small group of people engaged in a bit of freedom of speech and assembly without really bothering the politicians, to whom they would of course, be an embarrassment anyway, so it was only courteous that they would not have bothered them or their devotees with their plans. A lot of them aren’t even voters. Nothing to do with corporate politics at all, no money to send, nor interest in sending it if they had it, no votes for the Diebold people to process according to their instructions. A breath of spring? A whisper of hope? Maybe. Or maybe just a fluke. We will see.
I can’t find it now because of the primitive alleged search feature, but a while back I posted a comment about orbits, various events, independent of each other.
The point was that while the corporate rule shenanigans and political hijinks do not have any relation to actual events in the reality based universe in which most people live, they do provide a psychological benefit to people who don’t have much else. Oh they have money, just not much else.
So it doesn’t matter that the politicians have nothing to offer the poor, the female, the ethnic minorities, gay people, sick people. Embarrassments. Especially the poor. So many more of them than there were just a few weeks ago, too.
The politicians and their devotees have their orbit, their speeches and suits and their money, and they should just do their thing like they have been doing, and take care of their interests, like they have been doing, and avoid embarrassment, avoid making themselves vulnerable to smears and accusations of being “leftist,” an absurd charge if there ever was one, in a country without a left! Or the lethal charge that they don’t support the war on terror. Or are suspected of having anti-business sympathies, all charges that are all unfair and untrue. And all charges that the Republicans just love to throw at Democrats. Even though America, at least affluent America, mainstream, healthy America, we all know, speaks with one voice. And on to Teheran!
No need to bother about the embarrassments. They will be fine, and do their thing, as the politicians do theirs. Independent orbits.
Thank you, that’s helpful.
I resent the time and energy and space that takes away from real issues and real progress…. and I think it was my own foolishness to become engaged.
It reminds me of one of the tenets of AA: to put principles before personalities. It works for me.
of you, Rumi. when all of the features mentioned are combined made a big difference to me, too. As I was reading your exchanges with BooMan, I was getting increasingly anxious, wondering if Boo is suspicious of me because I sometimes declare positions that are not supportive of the Democratic party. So, yeah, I was taking it personally as well. What a relief that one little phrase was.
Thanks for the support. Once again, these exchanges show that they benefit others who might not speak out and that rational discussion is productive. When I’m critical of the Democrat Party, it’s only because I want to see it change for the better.
I have seen way too many flame wars because somebody did not read something wrong. Since there is no visual body language, or the slight humm in a person’s voice you can hear….it is hard to tell.
Its like what mi abuelo told me once, (especially in flame wars) – En boca cerrada, no entran moscas.
I don’t post there most of the time, because I find those threads boring. I come to blogs to discuss politics, not music. If I want to discuss music, I track down these people called “friends” that I know in “real life” and talk about music with them.
Either you’re calling me a troll (and violating your own rule #1 again) or are wrong.
Right-wing trolls are not the ONLY kind, Booman.
Trolling for Dollars.
Trolling for Power.
Trolling for Spooks.
Trolling for LOTS of things.
BET on it.
I personally think that the whole DKos system is a GIGANTIC troll.
Fromk the so-called “center”.
Proof?
Beyond my means.
But if it quacks like duck…
And a troll doesn’t need a fictitious name to exist.
Once the troll’s bona fides are well established…why ANYONE WITH ACCESS TO THAT ACCOUNT CAN BE “MR/MS TROLL, ESQ.”
Now…I am not too impressed with our Mr. Sluggo, either but…
Out of the mouths of trolls can often come…hooks.
Unintended acceleration to the truth of the matter.
Later…
AG
that is just paranoia.
I have an inside view, and I have whatever credibility I have, and Daily Kos is not run by trolls, and they have no hidden agenda.
Frankly, the effort to paint them as such trolls, as evidenced by the painstaking efforts of, for example, Parker, is the best evidence of a right-wing troll.
Especially when those efforts are combined with a total message discipline, and combined with utter indiffence to the feelings of community members.
Bet on it.
Yup.
I think you’re right that the place isn’t run by trolls. The reality is worse than that: it’s not a CONSPIRACY, it’s a MINDSET.
Would that it were a right-wing plot.
(Note: that comment does NOT apply to MB, who I don’t think subscribes to the ‘mindset’–but there are myriad others over there who do).
First of all, whatever mindset you are referring to does not apply to Meteor Blades, or Armando, or DemfromCT, or, obviously, Plutonium Page, SusanG, Georgia10, McJoan…etc.
Markos and Jerome Armstrong have a particular view about STRATEGY, and it is all laid out in their book. If that is the mindset you are referring to, it is limited to them and has nothing to do with the other front-pagers, who have their own varied political views.
And Markos did a very smart thing in his choices for front-pagers this year. He chose several women, all of whom I wanted to write here, BTW, and he deserves credit for that. In 2005, there was way too much testosterone on the site, as Armando is the first to admit.
Is it bold cap time again:
NOTE
(Note: that comment does NOT apply to MB, who I don’t think subscribes to the ‘mindset’–but there are myriad others over there who do).
Or was it unclear that MB in “MB, who I don’t think subscribes to the ‘mindset’-” referred to Meteor Blades?
Or was it the grammar that was unclear (technically, it should have read “whom” I don’t think” subscribes to the mindset”?
Either way, I think I was clear in stating that *”I DON’T THINK M[eteor] B[lades] SUBSCRIBES TO THE MINDSET”
As to the fact that there are myriad others over there who do: I stand by what I say, and there are myriad others on THIS site (i.e. here in the pond) who agree, many of whom refuse to post over there for precisely this reason.
I have no names to name: I don’t deal in cyberfictions. Unless there is a known, identified, real human being behind it–it’s just a screenname to me.
Well…this whole thing has to do with definitions, here, folks.
What IS a “troll”?
MY definition…one who uses the internet to forward goals other than the ones that he or she is formally espousing.
Now this could be the run-of the-mill “NYAH NYAH NYA NYAH NYAH!!! YOUR OL’ LADY WEARS COMBAT BOOTS” kind of troll. It’s not really about the person being trashed. It’s just about getting off on negative energy. Nuthin’ personal. Just endorphins. I personally believe…from extensive personal experience…that DHinMI and RedDan (just to name two of many over there) fit this description to a “T”. Probably combined with some sort of serial substance abuse, untreated bipolar state and/or NOT taking their meds every day. Three days of (relative) anity followed by a week of KaBOOM!!! Over and over and over again. It was like taking a course in internet-based pathology at Dkos the last few months that iI was there. (Spring to July 4th, last year.) Michael Savage in mirror image at every turn. Now DHinMI is VERY intelligent, and quite learned. So was Hannibal Lecter in “The Silence of the Lambs.” So was Henry Kissinger. Ain’t about intelligence. It’s about illness. The cause doesn’t really mattter. It’s the hurting that counts.
Or…a troll could be the wingnut in disguise kind…the “Now seriously folks, I am all for freedom of sexual action and also for the Democratic Party, but…DIDJA SEE THE MOUTH ON THAT MONICA BABE!!!??? Wooo HOOOO!!! No WONDER Bill coudn’t keep his pecker in his pants!!! Especially with that dyke Hillary on his case all the time.” Etc. You know the drill.
Or…it COULD be a group of people who start a blog dedicated to so-called “liberal” ideas but do not allow freedom of thought or speech…the one concept upon which “liberalism” is most strongly based…ON that blog .
Are they Intel-sponsored internet hit men?
Maybe…some of them… but I doubt it.
With people like this, the CIA doesn’t need to infiltrate the left. It’s already shot to hell.
Are they secret supporters of some as yet unnamed candidate or movement…or even undecided as yet towards WHOM they will try to swing the weight of their constituency? A constutuency that has been quite carefully culled of all original thinkers over the past year or so, thus making it ever more malleable to their wishes.
STILL trolls.
The Unconsious Troll.
He THINKS that he is doing something good, but in reality he is just using his enemies’ weapons. And thus becoming that enemy.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
We have emailed the enemy, and he is us.
Or…is it some people who saw quite clearly that a good profit could be made by molding the forces of the internet left into a movement that could be sold? And thus bought? With just a LEETLE TEENY BIT OF COMPROMISE.
“I won’t put it all the way in, baby…just enough to get over” blended with “I won’t come in your mail, and the check’s in my mouth.”
A little of all of the above, in my view.
And VERY dangerous.
So it goes.
You know…the left has Quislings, too.
And some of ’em don’t even know the name of the quiz show.
You Bet Your Life v.2.
Later…
AG
P.SD. Meteor Blades? I have never read anyhing of his (hers?) that does not make good sense. How he can ally himself with that pack of dogs over there is beyond me. But then…so are lots of other things.
So it goes…
I never read or post in the social-type threads, except for, briefly, the garden thread. I rarely post, and probably do choose controversial threads to post in. But I am not a troll, just a person who wishes to limit my time on the internet and is not particularly interested in making online friends.
I’ve always thought the most damaging practice mixing politics and the internet is the practice giving out call lists for campaigns to anonymous individuals across the country. Now there’s where a troll can do some real damage.
I just find it interesting that this diarist posts such a controversial topic about well respected members of a community, especially dragging this over here and then disappears. Someone that has never commented here before. Someone may be trying to flame up some blog fights. Then again, maybe I am way off base.
I waited a few minutes after posting this, no one had responded, so I went back to bed for a nap. As a real person, I’ve also got a real life that extends far beyond posting online.
So much for the mystery of my “vanishing act.”
So far, not a single commenter finds it odd that Miss Blue shows up, and supposedly reads the Meteor Blades diary and posts a comment in just 32 seconds?
I need to make this perfectly clear – I believe George Bush and his cronies should be tried for treason. So I fully support his impeachment, and do not mean to imply that anyone who does is a troll – far from it. However, we cannot impeach unless we retake Congress, and we cannot retake Congress if the machines cheat and prevent us from doing so, and those who are anti-BBV research who also do nothing more than prop up a website for impeaching him are highly suspect…IMO. The anti-Bush website in a situation like this is nothing more than a prop, designed to give legitimacy to someone who at the same time is up to no good.
Anyone can create a website. Anyone can post anti-Bush messages.
I was told once by a good friend that everyone uses proxies and sockpuppets, so perhaps these kinds of things are considered normal and acceptable behavior…I guess I’m in the minority by thinking they are devious and dishonest.
I want to thank Booman for allowing this diary to stay; however, I have to strongly disagree with the statement that the only way to recognize trolls is by what they don’t post. Of course it might help by defining what exactly is a troll. IMO, a troll is someone who puts out disinfo, spreads disinfo, is behind the curtain in an effort to put out disinfo, or goes around hijacking diaries with or without the use of disinfo, for starters.
Trolls can be spotted by what they post, or how they behave, just as much if not more than by what they don’t post. And there are certainly trolls from the far-left, as well as the far-right…LaRouchies, for example.
This group of trolls by the name of “Activisms” at commongroundcommonsense.org operated 24 hours a day for many, many days at a time. At first they blended in with the crowd, but around the middle of November 2004, they began putting out blatant disinformation regarding election fraud. They also operated at Bev’s site and DU.
This troll at Daily Kos was a very different kind of troll. Famous for posting a single diary about seeing with his own eyes the use of white phosphorus, which shot up to the top of the “big board” – and then was deleted when I posted ample proof that the guy was a con, we began an email exchange, and he refused to tell his story to a journalist I had standing by to write up his story for a larger audience. In this case, he was certainly not posting right-wing messages or hijacking diaries – he was simply put, “the Liberal US Marine,” posting claims of seeing something that I’m sure some real US marines had seen…but isn’t there something dishonest and discreditable in someone creating a false personna in order to write up things? I tend to think so.
By the way, a little bit about myself…
1. I investigate scams against our seniors. I was the original source of documents for Raw Story’s expose of Amy Riderman and the NCPPR. If anyone would like to receive scans of these letters that target our seniors, just email me at SluggoJD at SBCGlobal dot net.
here, here, and here.
2. I worked with Joseph Cannon recently on his expose’ of Joseph Wilkes, MZM, Cunningham, et al.
here.
3. I have investigated charges against Bev Harris for over a year, I have the audio of her Randi Rhodes appearance on 12/14/04 – the one that is not available in archives, and I have now proven that there are direct links between the campaign to malign her, and Tom Flocco – and in case anyone didn’t know, Flocco IS a right-wing disinfo artist.
If anyone would like to listen to that Randi Rhode audio and judge for themselves, go here and read, join the group so that you can access the FILES section, go to FILES, and the link to the audio interview is there. Use Realplayer.exe to open it. The Yahoo group is not for discussion – I merely created it to store evidence and write about it.
Thanks for reading,
John
Popped in between fantasy drafts and need to correct a typo – Amy Ridenour, not Amy Riderman.
BTW for those who don’t know, Amy Ridenour should be a very big target for us Dems – CNP member, mails scam letters to seniors, linked to Delay and Abramoff, as well as Gary Jarmin and his Moonie buddies.
She is a real bad ass, and needs to be taken down. The letters she sends out to our seniors are despicable, and people like that need to be burned at the stake IMO for cheating older folks.
John
Hi all, shumard here , stopping by to say hello and add my 0.02 euros ($0.028 cents):
First of all, I am Not sure why diarist even mentioned Meteor in this diary. Imo, MB is a thoughtful, fair-minded and venerable DKos senior contributor (who even throws me ‘4’s, now and then by the way).
Perhaps the Diarist made a mistake or a gaff in diary wording or through having read little of MB’s Dkos work? Who knows.
What seems more puzzling is that when the diary subject is “house trolls” (transparently disruptive/consistently obnoxious ‘johnny-on-the-spot’ uid#s which nevertheless are rather curiously tolerated/given free rein to abuse by the Dkos ‘strict constructionist’ management) on specific tip-toey subjects, or certain persona non grata like Bev Harris (please look through to see the interesting conversation and, and note the time stamps), etc., the elephant in the living room is not even mentioned.
But then again maybe i am the only one who finds that to be curious.
Late to the “party” and missing the point.
We live in times where the govt control by psychological operations has been stated as a goal. It’s also been said by the govt that the internet is a war front in the TWAT and that dissidents, critics and activists are considered a credible threat. The wiretap issue is nothing compared to the violations incurred due to datamining and questionable tactics of manipulation to gain personal information from users. Billions are spent and corruption has been instrumental in many of these first surveillance contracts by private firms/govt. There’s a lot at stake for many different interests.
Anyone who is pursuing an agenda by deception could be considered a troll, in my opinion.