...is blowing in their wind

Comme on disent en français, ils petent plus haut que leurs culs.

See the last attempt at resolution:

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2004/06/293753.html

theres enough useless crap posted here already without more nonsense getting through

In an ideal world sure blah idealist-anarchist utopianism blah blah, but this isn't an ideal world, this is a capitalist world. A revolutionary movement needs discipline, if trolls weren't supressed this site would be virtually useless.

See how long it takes this piece of "non- news" (posted by a self-confessed troll)to disappear off the wire. I give it 5 minutes and counting...

I must cobnfess i have never read the rules for posting, but it seems to me that
this culture of calling anyone who breaks them a 'troll' has some dangerous precedents

sure those posting porn - as someone once did to a piece i'd written about local issues-
is a real no - no, after all peple of all ages visit this site...

Keeping that in mind, why are so many comments considered 'troll' like?

Is there a 'troll factor' that can be measured?

I suspect not...

Is the filtering designed to save our poor sensibilities from exposure
to 'nasty people'?

is this not patronising, as i'm sure we all encounter dickheads
in our non-cyber lives...

what do we do with real 'trolls'?

do we label them? dehumanize them and
give them a reason to continue being what they are being?

or do we just ignore them and use what they have said to our benefit...
by NOTING what they have said and using it as evidence because it is
out there and plain to see...

after all how would we know what a 'troll' is, without seeing them regularly?


let's say, that to begin with...
after a process of discrimination...
all 'trolls' are hidden,
but then people forget, because that level
of discrimination becomes acceptable...

and so it's on to the next level,

it could be EMF activists, [as discriminated by 'tin foil hats']
or conspiracy [usually with 'nuts' as an appendage]

eventually everyone is scared to voice thier real opinion
because they are not sure with stereotype
they fit more closely...

and anyone who is young / new to this
will never be able to see the crap that some people write...
the level that some people stoop to...

and also more sinisterly, the mechanisms used by spooks and nazis
in order to detract, personally attack, ridicule etc.
away from interesting points and debates

...eventually through fear of being considered a 'troll'
everyone will just want to post stuff from the
main news media and it all gets REAL boring...


just thought i'd make those points
ta...

you know yr up against a spurious shite when the argument they put forth depends upon first pushing that which they attempt to refute to an idiotic extreme. Such as suggesting that the only alternative put on the table to the unfairness currently perceived by many (regarding trolls and the suppression of reasonable, legitimate arguments), is to have an utter free-for-all where every troll and his dog leaps out from under the bridge and wallows in malicious, destructive abandon. (Ooh, no, don't want that. Better stay as we are and trust those in charge. SOUND FAMILIAR PEOPLE?)

What people seem to be asking for (after a debate that doesn't itself just get wiped off)is a little more openness, transparency and justification where things get hidden and removed. This has been a real problem IMHO, increasing of late, with too many examples of personal bias and misuse of power to recount.

SyndicatedA's reasoning comes from the same doggerol textbook where you can find these sorts of gems:

"Alright alright, whinge about police brutality all you like. If they didn't bang a few heads together now 'n' then we'd all have our mothers raped and children disembowelled; now stop playing at changing the world and get real. Like me."

"So, we may have made a few mistakes down here at Guantanamo, we've 'fessed up' about that. But Christ, should all these terrorists just walk around free? What kind of democracy would that be?"

Not that I'm suggesting that Indy is like the British pigs or the US army (So don't take me to task over that.) It's syndicatedA's useless, false logic I'm talking about.

Indy's a fucking great, valuable site. The reason I'm being so critical of late is because it's just heart-rending seeing it get fucked around with so much. Let's get this small-minded shit dealt with.

Jim, the thread is only still visible because they are enjoying the God-like power of being able to pull it whenever it pleases them most.

This whole disagreement reaks of the argument about supporting Blair because to vote Green/Respect/Anything else I really believe in would let the BNP in. We have to keep the newswire within what we (they) believe in (or understand) because otherwise we might get overwhelmed by stuff that wasn't covered in our (their) degree courses (briefing).

Or to be even more cynical, perhaps it suits them (and their handlers) that we only discuss things that are 'out there' that we can manage/contain - that way we (they) are seen to be on side but we (they) still do the master's work.

'But', I hear them bleat, 'how can you suggest thet we have handlers? We don't accept sponsorship. There are no banners on the site! We don't accept money from anybody who doesn't show their UB40!' (am I showing my age?!).

And I suppose there were never any members of the Special Branch in London Greenpeace (or DGSE members in Greenpeace Aukland for that matter!). The SWP's refusal to go beyond blaming Bush and Blair for everything and damnation of anything remotely New World Order/Illuminati/Skull and Bones/Freemasonry as conspiracy theory is evidently part of the same briefing.

No, IMC volunteers, that you cannot engage (or even allow free engagement) in the most contentious issues by hiding articles is a clear sign that you are not the right people to be doing the job. Sorry to quote Greenpeace again, but when they stood in front of a sealers harpoon it was questioned whether your (their) back was broad enough. That was twenty years ago. Now we must ask if your mind is broad enough.

And while I think about it, how appropriate to mention Paul Daniels! Not the master of illusion, more the master of distraction. Just like any effective deception, it is necessary to draw the victims attention to something else whilst their pockets are picked. And if that doesn't work and one or two of your victims realise what is going on - just accuse them of imagining it. And if they persist and you can't shut them up - just arrange for them to be found dead with an orange in their mouth. Nobody will believe a word then, will they!

You are only ever 2 mouse clicks away from the 'view all posts' page. Currently hidden replies do not appear there; this is a technical issue that is on the collective's to-do list, and hopefully will get sorted out soon. Hidden articles are visible though.

If you want a newswire that can be made useless by one bored fascist, then fine lets stop hiding troll comments. Indymedia is under no obligation to support attacks against its utility.

As to the hiding of genuine disagreements, opposing views etc... I haven't seen any hidden, just trolled one liners and unsubstantiated speculative 'news'. If you like this stuff, see the 'view all posts' page. And *remember*, posts can be unhidden very easily . . . if you really feel agrieved, as opposed to just trying to discredit/distract IMC-UK and its users, then email the features list and unhiding can be discussed with the collective.

This is far more democratic and participatory than mainstream media, the Daily Mail is very definately included in this. If 'troll' is being used as a fig leaf for censorship, then email the features list and it can be addressed. If not we'll just have to assume you're making it up as you go along . . . any links to these 'censored' troll posts?

Newswire Open Posting Guidelines
articles and/or comments may be hidden for the following reasons:

Non-news : posts which are clearly purely comment, opinion or rants unrelated to a recent event or action etc.

which is the reason this post is hidden. 'Trolls', incidentally is short hand for this lot

Disruptive : Contributions by individuals who habitually publish above mentioned discouraged content.

and that is all about maintaining the credibility of the newswire and the site as a whole. Simple as that.

Um, because they're mainly secret state assets recruited at Oxbridge maybe... keeping yiz nice & fluffy & liberal & irrelevant. This probably won't make it up there, as keywords such as my site address and even my name seem to have been blocked from posting; although now that I've said this, then maybe it will. Very Orwellian a course...

IndyMedia is there to share news on grassroots initiatives, events and actions working towards social change.

There are many other topics that this does not cover. And there are other platforms for these topics to be published. None of my posts nor comments have ever been hidden - but you can be sure none of the info I have shared is in the mainstream media.

There are many activists who think that their issue is the most important, the one that everybody should be paying attention to, to prevent the end of the world. Well, this is not the case. There is no such issue. All issues have their importance, people have suffered, are suffering and will suffer - we are not going to change the world in a fortnight.

Though all issues may have their importance, not all of them relate to indymedia's work. If a post tells us of an initiative, event or action aimed at preventing, or stopping, chemtrails, would it qualify for indymedia ? Maybe. If someone tells us that there is a governement conspiracy to poison us all, does it qualify for indymedia ? NO ! It is not about grassroot initiatives, events and actions. There are other platforms for these types of posts.


blip.

"If you want a newswire that can be made useless by one bored fascist, then fine lets stop hiding troll comments."


Funny how we have had to put up with Depleted Uranium is good for you type comments from arsholes like 'Sceptic' for months...Speaking of Trolls...Ever see a posting (rather than a comment) made by 'Sceptic'...?

Geez, I even had an article confirming the very real dangers of DU removed because an IMC'er merely claimed it was a repeat posting, when it clearly was not. I even pointed out to the IMC'er that it was not a repeat posting. But was it unhidden ? Was it fuck as like!

I have also made comments of other topics only to be called a 'BNP Troll' by the IMC admin... (note to IMC: your crystal ball is faulty)

Are Prince Phillip and Alistair Campbell IMC admin staff me wonders?

Where does it say IMC is only about "initiatives, events and actions"?

Indymedia UK is a network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial *coverage of important social and political issues*.

Trolling is a difficult issue for Indymedia sites. Trolling in general is a problem for open-posting services. It's usually difficult to tell what is and isn't a troll, and sometimes it really does come down to a matter of judgement. Given that Indymedia sites (and Usenet newsgroups) can be rendered completely useless by trolls, this is an important thing to be discussing.

What's a troll?
At risk of sounding patronising, I'm going to offer a definition. A "troll" is a person who posts messages with the intention of disrupting the forum they're posting to. At their best, troll posts can be very funny. The troll works by provoking others into replying to their posts, so the damage is usually not directly the result of the troll's own posts, but of the replies. Really "good" trolls make very subtle posts, that are almost on-topic, and perhaps witty. Their posts are usually, but not necessarily, provocative in nature. On Usenet, it seems that the great majority of trolls are attention-seekers; but on IMC sites, a significant number of trolls may be politically-motivated trouble-makers. Please read this essay:

 http://docs.indymedia.org/twiki/pub/Global/ImcEssayCollection/In_Times_of_Netwar_v0-9.pdf

It discusses some of the the ways that TPTP can use trolling techniques to render an alternative medium useless. It's a very good essay; all contributors should read it, IMO.

If you want to know more about trolls, please read this article:
 http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

Here's a link to a more detailed article, specifically about Usenet trolls:
 http://digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html

Should IMC people be hiding troll-posts?
If the post meets the editorial guidelines, I personally think there's no justifcation for hiding it. If the post is disruptive, but complies with the guidelines, then it seems to me that there must be a defect in the guidelines. But that's just my opinion (and I don't participate in the "cleaning" of the newswire).

Incidentally: if you don't like the way the editing is done, you can join the email-list on which newswire-editing is discussed, and get involved. Subscription to the list is open. The URL is  http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/listinfo/imc-oxford-features .

Trolling of Indymedia sites is a difficult subject, because it's intrinsically hard to determine what is and what isn't a troll post; because it's hard to say whether a given provocative post is trollish, or just a provocative post; and because Indymedia sites are targeted by both amateur trolls (attention-seekers) and professionals (disrupters; see the essay link above - it's a good article).

Best regards,
Ximenes.

A: When your an "Astroturf" Troll.

For instance, if the Chemical/Pharma Cabal want to hide the very real neurological and immune system effects of pollutants on the publics health they could (and do) attempt to undermine those whose health is effected by getting eminent psychologists to repeatedly suggesting they actually have a mental illness caused by stress (e.g. Professor Simon Wessely on Gulf War Syndrome).

One way an Astroturf organisation could help this type of pseudoscientific fraud could be to start a fake grassroots campaign for those with mental illness cause by pollution. Therefore the Astroturf organisation subliminally gives the impression that pollution somehow causes mental illness by proxy of it very existence. Yet, when you think about it objectively how can pollution ever *bio-medically* cause a "disease of the mind" or "mental illness"...? Logically it can not, it can only cause a bio-medical illness that demands bio-medical classification for research and treatment purposes, if not, then at least for insurance cover and disability benefits for those affected. Although that doesn't stop some people, such as Indymedia giving a platform to organizations that falsely promote the completely erroneous notion that pollution causes somehow causes a 'disease of the mind', as oppose to devastating organic neurological and immune system illnesses.

As a side note to demonstrate how important this single example is to us all I though some may be interested in the following article (and its responses) from the British Medical Journal telling us Bush & Co's plans to screen whole US population for mental illness, including pre-school children... Of course, what happens in the US will surely follow in the UK. (See - article:  http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/328/7454/1458 - responses:  http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/328/7454/1458 ) As one reply in the BMJ states: "The definition of fascism is the complete union of corporations and government", and sadly, that's what has happening, thanks to pseudoscientific fraud helped out by Astroturf organisations (their Trolls), and of course the media fools/whores (delete where appropriate) who (perhaps unwittingly?) propagate their lies and who provide a host for their viral marketing initiative.

Perhaps now IMC'ers will realise why wankers like 'Sceptic' who repeatedly deny the dangers of DU (by using an aray of MoD/Government/Corporate pseudoscientific bollocks) make so many IMC readers angry. Of course it doesn't help if those who try to counter-spin what is being said by these professional Trolls are themselves accused of being Trolls by admin staff...

BTW, using current IMC admin reasoning, I think "Ximenes" real identity must either Jonathan Cainer or Russle Grant. (sorry if that was even the slightest bit funny...I'm not a Troll so I must remember not to be funny when I comment here...)

For me the main issue is control, the methods by which it is introduced range from the possibilities of ELF frequencies to dental amalgams to Michael Moore's slight hold back from the truth. The elite types are holding back from being discovered and want to keep the whole populace in thrall, whether it's to porn, reality TV or missed-point political activity as sold by Moore
There is a very real need to sidestep the various deceptions and to occasionally snap up on the bridge where the billy goats of given perception parade themselves trip=trapping into the pervading conceptions
There are very easy do-it-yourself fightbacks available at only small personal risks
But first you need to understand the nature of the enemy

 http://makeashorterlink.com/?I52A148A8