I read Mat's article about leaving and thought "darn, another troll victim",
then I read the responses to him and couldn't help but wonder why people had
to attack him instead of letting him go gracefully - some even had two goes
at him. Why? These same people have answered troll bait and helped to create
the problem, just recently I have noticed even some of the more respected
members making repeated posts to trolls. That to me is bad behaviour as they
know better. They know most people plonk trolls immediately, they also know
that by answering trolls they bring the posts back onto our radar.
This is a concerted attack by experienced trolls, every reply is a win for
them - don't do it. If you *must* do something, email those who do reply and
ask them to not crosspost or reply to trolls. If you get abused by these
people don't worry, they obviously have no regard for the group if they
continue to participate in the troll - plonk them. The other option is to
report the troll, replies only make it worse.
Just my 2c worth.
I'll agree that some of these trolls are so inflammatory and so hard to
ignore! You must have the discipline to ignore them. These are very
disturbed people. Very, very disturbed.
I guess the fact is he didn't go "gracefully". He had to let us know he
was about to "leave" the group. Hoping for others on the Wreck to beg
one to stay is a pathetic ploy. I stand by my original slam of his
post. Let's just agree to disagree on this one, ok?
PS: As a matter of fact...HE LIED TO US!! He has been on the Wreck
today. Let him go...
No Dave, I won't agree to that, as it believe it to be the wrong approach
and sending the wrong signals to others. Your assuming what his intentions
were without facts to base it on. It is a possibility, but not a known fact.
Sometimes, a little sympathy can go a long way. A little support will help
someone endure who may become a valued poster later, a little cohesion shown
by the group will help it endure these troll attacks. The united approach,
yes? Band together in times of crises etc.
Perhaps he thought better of it, good on him. It can be difficult to admit
an error made in a fit of pique. His treatment was a bit unfair, let's be
intolerant to the trolls, but tolerant of each other.
Greg, I'm confused about why you stated your refusal to disagree and
then went on to disagree. I think you might have misunderstood what I
meant by "agree to disagree". I meant let's drop this tired subject, as
we both have our own widely divergent ideas regarding these type of
Arguing is futile. When one has a chance to change anothers opinion,
discussion is worthwhile. At some point it becomes clear to end it.
We've reached the end, I think!
I understand the semantics of the words used Dave. I wrote what I did as I
was not willing to 'drop the subject'. You asked if I was willing to "agree
to disagree", which presupposes no further discussion. I said no to that,
then expanded on what I felt needed to be said.
As to changing your opinion, I can see that is unlikely. However, this is a
newsgroup where varied opinions are usually welcome because it gives people
the benefit of differing perspectives. I shared my opinion based on my
observations and participation in this particular newsgroup over the period
I have been a member.
I value what I receive from this group and return value where I can, so when
you ask me to agree to disagree, in this instance, I saw that as restricting
my ability to add something to the group and therefore ignored it.
Dave, I am willing to come to your point of view if you can explain to me
how it benefits the group by abusing a member stating an opinion. I notice
JOAT is taking a sabatical, so why wasn't he also pilloried for not slinking
away quietly? It's inconsistent, don't you agree?
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.