Calling Troll On New Posters

[Sandstone]

This is a general musing, based on a few threads in recent months. I don't want to get into specifics on any particular threads or individuals. I'm not offering any solutions, or even saying there are any, just typing my recent thoughts. I wonder if we label people as Trolls too readily? There is a difference between deliberate trolling, and being very bad at engaging with us.

First, the whole Criterion A thing. In general, members here are keen to ensure that a new poster claiming PTSD actually has the condition, and that has to be right, because otherwise we would be flooded with endless vaguely unhappy people. I wonder if sometimes, though, people just can't manage to tell us what it's really about. In my own case, the actual onset of PTSD came from a non-Criterion A event, and if I hadn't seen the links to my past I could have rolled up here with all the symptoms but no Criterion A. There are people who can't bring themselves to mention the true issues until they have built some trust, and people who don't currently recall their trauma.

Additionally, don't I recall that the site has been opened up to those with other trauma based conditions?

Then, disruptive and raging behaviour - the thing that gets newbies banned most quickly. I AM NOT CRITICISING THOSE BANS. I can see that it is harmful both for the forum and for the individual for it to be allowed. But my heart breaks for some people who are so clearly in pain and need to learn a way to ask for help that isn't an attack on all around. Do we confirm to them that they will be rejected, without showing a better alternative approach? From my own experience, I grew up with parents who raged, sulked and blamed others whenever they were distressed. It was only when I saw others outside the home manage things differently that I realised there were alternative ways to manage uncomfortable feelings. Is there a way to model calmer, boundaried behaviour to these newbies before they get banned?

Finally, proving a point. We can get more engaged with proving the point against a new poster than with seeing them as people. I've been guilty of reading these threads for entertainment, and forgetting that a possibly hurting person is on the other end. Often when we are in pain we are quite illogical. It's useful to look at why that happens, but for myself I need to do it when I'm calmer. Once I have recognised something in that un-triggered state, I may be able to pick it up when I am in distress too. I'm afraid that initially though, when we tell people that they are wrong about something, they hear that they are faulty and to blame.

As I say - these are my mental ramblings recently. What do you think?

 

[StellaBlue]

I think your thoughts are very wise and compassionate. I agree that there seem to be newer folks who may not have developed the most effective means of interacting and expressing their distress without flaming others or coming across as combative. I try to stay away from those threads (although they do have a certain "train wreck" pull to them). I like that you try to recognize that there is (most likely) a person in pain behind these types of threads and I agree that that person is most likely not a "troll" in the typical sense of the word. I am not sure what the answer is, other than ignoring them when they start to derail.

 

[StarChild]

I don't want to get into specifics on any particular threads or individuals.

Hi @stenni, and why don't you want to go into specifics about particular threads? Because that's what it all is about; One has to look at every person individually. I don't understand the sense of discussing this "in general" without looking at specific situations / threads. Could you help me to understand your reasoning?

 

[Sandstone]

why don't you want to go into specifics about particular threads.

Partly because it's too much effort to go back over a couple months or more looking for the threads that have set my thought train in process. They may be older than that, I don't only read recent threads. I've also been influenced by what I see on an unrelated forum I frequent.

Partly because I'd rather look forward and see if there is something I / we can do better.

But mainly because I don't want to personalise it or rehash previous threads. Knowing how so many of us react, there will be people who read this thread and feel attacked themselves so want to leap to their own defence, and others who take possibly undue blame on themselves and feel bad. I'd rather not do anything to precipitate either reaction.

 

[anthony]

From a staff view, most newbies who display trolling behaviour, typically get warned first, especially if that behaviour is more combative, we typically ask them to calm down and respect member views and such... and if not, we action as deemed appropriate. Then you have those who may look to be trolling, and some members think they are, yet staff may disagree based on experience and things we see that members do not.

Then you have fairly clear trolls, regardless whether the person is or is not, if their posting 100% reflects it by definition of trolling, and subsequent responses continue to reflect it, they're out of here.

The recent example of the person claiming to be an abuser, wanting forgiveness or such from those abused here. Whether that person is legitimate or not, you don't come onto a community with those abused and traumatised by abusers, as one, stating it, stating you don't have PTSD, but you feel bad and can't help yourself. That by definition is trolling, as the posts are aimed to get an emotional response that borders aggressive, pissed off, so forth, from the community. Regardless of their intent, the end outcome is going to upset the majority of members who read it.

That is one facet of the staff side. A lot of experience is also at play in identifying trolling behaviour, along with various staff watching and providing independent opinions on the situation. When all parties, or most, tend to mesh... call a duck a duck, action and move onwards.

 

[Sandstone]

ou don't come onto a community with those abuse and traumatised by abusers, as one, stating it, stating you don't have PTSD, but you feel bad and can't help yourself.

Yes, that was a pretty clear case - not what we are here for. It wasn't one that I counted into this.

 

[scout86]

This is kind of an interesting topic. To begin with, it's something that I think is usually handled pretty well here. It's something I've been paying some attention to, because I'm trying to learn "how these things are done." A lot of the time, I "don't get it" and the process here has been educational. Both for good and bad.

One of the things that I've found interesting is how differently different people are reacted to. Most of the time, the response is compassionate and sympathetic. Once in awhile "Criterion A trauma" gets to be an issue right off. Different threads that look similar to me can go in wildly different directions. I'm curious about why. I suspect it depends a lot on who engages and what kind of day they're having.

For the most part, I'm not too worried about whether or not anyone "qualifies". No one ever asked ME to prove I had PTSD or have experienced "Criterion A" trauma. I think it's none of anyone else's business and I feel like what someone else has experienced is none of mine. If they have a hang nail rather than the broken leg they think they have, they'll probably figure it out if they hang around long enough. Meanwhile, they might learn somethings and that's got to be good.

I have a track record of getting involved with narcissists. At the same time, I can basically not believe anyone and believe anything. Watching the process here is kind of instructive. It's helped me sort through my own reactions and responses because there are so many more opportunities to do it than in "real life". And the staff seem to do a really good job of handling things and sort of model "normal" behavior and that's also been very helpful.

The same is true of the various ways other posters handle things. I can see the process of people getting caught up in their own slant on things to where they are actually responding to something that only exists in their own heads. I do that too now and then. The better I understand how it works, the better I can deal with it in myself.

All in all, this is a pretty good microcosm of the "real world". I've spent most of my life avoiding the "real world" as much as I could and this site has been a great tool for playing catch up. No matter how badly things start, usually someone chimes in with a call to reason.

So,@stenni are there some things you think we could do better? Some things you think we get wrong a lot? I think this is worth discussing.

 

[greenleaf]

The recent example of the person claiming to be an abuser, wanting forgiveness or such from those abused here. Whether that person is legitimate or not, you don't come onto a community with those abuse and traumatised by abusers, as one, stating it, stating you don't have PTSD, but you feel bad and can't help yourself. That by definition is trolling, as the posts are aimed to get an emotional response that borders aggressive, pissed off, so forth, from the community. Regardless of their intent, the end outcome is going to upset the majority of members who read it.

I am particularly glad that this one was banned, not that I've kept track of all the banned folks.

However a dynamic from my own history (that I have found out is pretty common) was that I was supposed to "take care of" my abuser. He was abused, after all, my grandmother would say, and since his behavior was worse than mine, he clearly had it worse than me, therefore I should take care of him and my own needs should be secondary.

Folks like the banned person are not taking responsibility for their own actions by asking sufferers for forgiveness, even if couched in other language. They cannot heal without taking responsibility. I suspect the responsibility taking comes first; I think abusing might have some aspects similar to addiction...

Yes, they are in pain too, it is tragic that they were abused too of course, but a tragedy none of us can solve is that taking responsibility comes from inside them, and we cannot ever do it for them.

Oh and by the way this p#sses me off seriously... glad that thread is closed...

 

[hodge]

Excellent explanation, Anthony. Thank you!

 

[scout86]

. He was abused, after all, my grandmother would say, and since his behavior was worse than mine, he clearly had it worse than me, therefore I should take care of him and my own needs should be secondary.

OH YES!

It's kind of funny. My own big "reaction" to that thread wasn't to the OP, it was to the sympathetic responses. This was one of those cases where I've learned enough to know that my first "go to" response was to ancient history more than the present conversation.

For the record, I've come to think that while maybe no one is born evil, I think it's quite possible that some are born more ethically challenged and have a propensity towards evil. if not handled "right" as children, They're aimed in the wrong direction from the start. I think this for a couple of reasons. First, I've dealt with enough animals in my life time that I've seen a huge variation in personalities from birth. I've seen just a couple foals, for example, who seemed to be mean from the second they hit the ground. This, when I knew their parents, and siblings, and environment from day one. Was it possible to teach them to not be mean? Yes, but working with them was always a bit different and I think a foal like that, born into an environment where it wasn't dealt with promptly and consistently would be likely to grow into the horse version of a serial killer. I suspect that's true across species.

My T says there's research to suggest a genetic component to narcissism too. I don't imagine it's a single gene "got it/don't got it" kind of deal but it's possible that some "bad" people are NOT the fault of bad things that were done to them. Some people MIGHT just enjoy being mean. Because I think that, my goal is to gather evidence before I decide I know what's going on.

 

[BlueOrange]

But my heart breaks for some people who are so clearly in pain and need to learn a way to ask for help that isn't an attack on all around. Do we confirm to them that they will be rejected, without showing a better alternative approach? From my own experience, I grew up with parents who raged, sulked and blamed others whenever they were distressed. It was only when I saw others outside the home manage things differently that I realised there were alternative ways to manage uncomfortable feelings. Is there a way to model calmer, boundaried behaviour to these newbies before they get banned?

If there is one thing that I would improve, it is this. Of course, my history inspires me to a lot of support for these 'underdogs', and my time spent in troll-infested places has desensitized me to a lot of troll behavior. I've been identified as a troll in this place before, and it took me a while to understand why that had happened.

In the end, I think it comes down to resources and priorities. The forum community as a whole is given priority over disruptive individuals. Counseling resources aimed at disruptive individuals are in short supply.

I think the priority is correct. I'd love there to be more resources, but the reality is that there aren't more resources.

So I agree that the problems are real, and that I'd like them to stop being real. But I don't see a realistic change that would actually make things better. I'm also less interested in unrealistic crusades than I once was.

The rules here are not the same as in other places. The rules here are not obvious to people who are used to other rules. But to have a viable community, it's better to exclude people who might have been good than to let in people who might be corrosive. People (like me when I first arrived) might have the potential for both. The fact that this site has no viable competitors is a clue as to the viability of alternative approaches.

 

[scout86]

The rules here are not obvious to people who are used to other rules.

I thought I remembered reading some kind of guidelines when I first joined? Or, maybe that's not the kind of "rules" you mean?

When someone gets banned here, if I understand correctly, it's not a permanent ban, at least not right off. That at least give people who are sincere the chance to back off and think about what went wrong, and try again. If they're at a point where they have the capacity to do that anyway. And everyone isn't. There is the chance, in other words, for "redemption", since that seemed to be a concern of yesterday's poster. Or for learning from your mistakes. (And I'm NOT so sure yesterday's poster was interested in THAT.)