ggkiller

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

Quoted message said:

killfiles for google groups.

Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

...d

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 11:38:17 +0000, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

Quoted message said:

killfiles for google groups.

Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

...d

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

Oh but TrollB is soooooooo interactive.

Tony Raven said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

Quoted message said:

killfiles for google groups.

Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

...d

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

I think you have spent more bandwidth chastising people for deciding to
engage with him than I have in the few posts I have made..

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

...d

Tony Raven said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

Quoted message said:

killfiles for google groups.

Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

But why not kf the wrestler and the troll?

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 13:04 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

Quoted message said:

killfiles for google groups.

Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

...d

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

I think you have spent more bandwidth chastising people for deciding to
engage with him than I have in the few posts I have made..

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Just ironic that you laud killfiles and yet continuously troll wrestle.
Google says you have wrestled him many more times than I have
chastised you or others - you have wrestled at least three times in the
last 24hrs in the Letter in Local Paper thread for example. But carry
on - I'm sure you will quickly change his views with your legendary
powers of troll persuasion and he will not enjoy the debate.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Tosspot wrote on 25/11/2006 14:11 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

Quoted message said:

killfiles for google groups.

Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

But why not kf the wrestler and the troll?

Because David otherwise posts interesting and useful stuff. But I'm on
the brink.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 15:11:53 +0100, Tosspot <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

Quoted message said:

killfiles for google groups.

Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

But why not kf the wrestler and the troll?

I find it hard to understand these arguments. When reading a
newspaper do you cut out those colomnists with whom you disagree? No,
you either ingnore those columns or a debate is raised in your head.

With urc's mission posters I choose largely to ingore what they write.

With urc's trolls, I respond or ignore. The choice is mine.

I would never consider ignoring a urc regular on the basis of their
replies to a troll or mission poster.

Tony Raven said:

Tosspot wrote on 25/11/2006 14:11 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

> killfiles for google groups.
>
> Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

But why not kf the wrestler and the troll?

Because David otherwise posts interesting and useful stuff. But I'm on
the brink.

Fair 'nuff, if the signal/noise is worth it carry on.

"Tom Crispin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But why not kf the wrestler and the troll?

I find it hard to understand these arguments. When reading a
newspaper do you cut out those colomnists with whom you disagree? No,
you either ingnore those columns or a debate is raised in your head.

With urc's mission posters I choose largely to ingore what they write.

With urc's trolls, I respond or ignore. The choice is mine.

I would never consider ignoring a urc regular on the basis of their
replies to a troll or mission poster.

You fail to understand what a troll is about then. He or she is not
interested in any form of meaningful *discussion* he or she is simply
interested in obtaining a response - any response - it's about winding up a
group: period.

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/troller.htm

In article <[email hidden]>

Tony Raven said:

Tosspot wrote on 25/11/2006 14:11 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

> killfiles for google groups.
>
> Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

But why not kf the wrestler and the troll?

Because David otherwise posts interesting and useful stuff. But I'm on
the brink.

My newsreader (Gravity) lets me set rules like

From contains "David Martin"
And
Body contains "Matt B"
Action: Mark as read

Apparently Thunderbird can do this sort of filtering with mail but not
with news - room for improvement I think.

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 14:53:59 -0000, "wafflycat"

w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com said:

"Tom Crispin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

But why not kf the wrestler and the troll?

I find it hard to understand these arguments. When reading a
newspaper do you cut out those colomnists with whom you disagree? No,
you either ingnore those columns or a debate is raised in your head.

With urc's mission posters I choose largely to ingore what they write.

With urc's trolls, I respond or ignore. The choice is mine.

I would never consider ignoring a urc regular on the basis of their
replies to a troll or mission poster.

You fail to understand what a troll is about then. He or she is not
interested in any form of meaningful *discussion* he or she is simply
interested in obtaining a response - any response - it's about winding up a
group: period.

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/troller.htm

In the case of the "Edward Dolan" mission poster and related posts,
I'm inclined to agree over the use of the killfile. It is a sensible
option, though not one I choose to use.

In the case of the troll, Matt B, I disagree. Clearly Matt takes a
deliberate contrary view to most, playing devil's advocate in many
cases. But he does sometimes make valid points, and though I've never
emailed him, he does appear to use a valid, albeit munged, email
address. He's a troll in as much as he posts deliberately provocative
posts, but not in the way he hangs around to answer those who
challenge him.

I think of him as a sort of group mascot. Like an delinquent
teenager, care in the community is what he needs. Return provocation
with patience, compassion and understanding and he can be saved.
Killfiling those who simply respond to him will gift him a sense of
power thereby encouraging him.

I will and do limit my responses to Matt, but reserve the right to
respond when I feel a gentle and understanding correction is required.

In article said:

Tosspot wrote on 25/11/2006 14:11 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

David Martin wrote on 25/11/2006 01:47 +0100:

> killfiles for google groups.
>
> Oooh - shame it isn't server side.

Shame you don't use killfiles on TrollB, preferring instead to keep
wrestling him here in public.

But why not kf the wrestler and the troll?

Because David otherwise posts interesting and useful stuff. But I'm on
the brink.

What's your view on arguing with trolls who also sometimes post
interesting and useful stuff? For example, Roland Perry....

Alan Braggins wrote on 25/11/2006 18:51 +0100:

Quoted message said:

What's your view on arguing with trolls who also sometimes post
interesting and useful stuff? For example, Roland Perry....

Is Roland in this group?

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

In article said:

Alan Braggins wrote on 25/11/2006 18:51 +0100:

Quoted message said:

What's your view on arguing with trolls who also sometimes post
interesting and useful stuff? For example, Roland Perry....

Is Roland in this group?

Not as far as I know. I just happened to come across the "how to treat
trolls" thread here soon after reading cam.*, and he was merely an example
of the general principle.

Quoted message said:

I will and do limit my responses to Matt, but reserve the right to
respond when I feel a gentle and understanding correction is required.

Have you noticed that he doesn't take on board *anything* that is said.
When proved wrong (he makes this deliberately easy) he merely replies with
more questions. In answering them a poster will eventually make a small
error and he'll sieze on this and prove himself 'right'.

His trolling is perhaps the ultimate evolution of the troll, in that it
isn't immediately obvious. Further, many who see him as a troll will
continue to reply in the mistaken belief that he is learning from what you
write. He isn't. He's just using it to post more questions. He stops
when he loses interest, you stop or he doesn't have the time due to other
trolling commitments.

The care in the community bit was prolly right thobut.

On 26 Nov 2006 13:39:51 GMT, Mark Thompson

pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com said:

Quoted message said:

I will and do limit my responses to Matt, but reserve the right to
respond when I feel a gentle and understanding correction is required.

Have you noticed that he doesn't take on board *anything* that is said.
When proved wrong (he makes this deliberately easy) he merely replies with
more questions. In answering them a poster will eventually make a small
error and he'll sieze on this and prove himself 'right'.

I know exactly what Matt B is about.

Quoted message said:

His trolling is perhaps the ultimate evolution of the troll, in that it
isn't immediately obvious. Further, many who see him as a troll will
continue to reply in the mistaken belief that he is learning from what you
write. He isn't. He's just using it to post more questions. He stops
when he loses interest, you stop or he doesn't have the time due to other
trolling commitments.

The care in the community bit was prolly right thobut.

That gives me an idea.

I'll preface, in the subject line, any reply I make to Matt B with
[CITC]. It will be trivial for anyone who doesn't want to read my
replies to him to kill the message automatically.

Tom Crispin wrote on 26/11/2006 14:16 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I'll preface, in the subject line, any reply I make to Matt B with
[CITC]. It will be trivial for anyone who doesn't want to read my
replies to him to kill the message automatically.

The lengths some people will go to troll wrestle!

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci

Mark Thompson said:

Quoted message said:

I will and do limit my responses to Matt, but reserve the right to
respond when I feel a gentle and understanding correction is required.

Have you noticed that he doesn't take on board *anything* that is said.
When proved wrong (he makes this deliberately easy) he merely replies with
more questions. In answering them a poster will eventually make a small
error and he'll sieze on this and prove himself 'right'.

But a response isn't necessarily aimed at the troll. Occasionally it is
appropriate to correct a misstatement where the correct interpretation
etc. is not particularly obvious and hasn't been stated. There are more
readers than posters.

...d

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 15:00:10 +0000, Tony Raven <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Tom Crispin wrote on 26/11/2006 14:16 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I'll preface, in the subject line, any reply I make to Matt B with
[CITC]. It will be trivial for anyone who doesn't want to read my
replies to him to kill the message automatically.

The lengths some people will go to troll wrestle!

As I've said before, I don't have a problem with Matt's posts. Indeed,
I often find his stance entertaining. I do have a problem with people
telling me who I can and can't respond to. I'm looking for a
compromise to keep everyone happy.