Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Moderators: UAdevil, JMarkJohns

Post Reply

Should we allow people to post here who only troll... even if we think it's done for humor?

No... why allow people on an AZ board who only troll AZ
8
35%
Maybe... Don't mind seeing conflicting views but if it seems mean spirited... they need to go
11
48%
Yes... I can handle the trolls and it actually makes a fun back and forth between posters
2
9%
Other...
2
9%
 
Total votes: 23

User avatar
Alieberman
Posts: 13750
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 11:50 am
Reputation: 2813
Location: I can't find my pants

Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by Alieberman »

I have been asked by several members why we haven't banned certain posters that are clearly trolling.

There is 1 troll most people question... and yes he is a troll... but I happen to find him funny... sometimes... and I think he's actually trying to be.

I almost banned him during the recent football coach debacle... simply because there was nothing funny about it and many posters were legitimately upset about what was happening to our football program.

I gave him a major warning that 1 more post about the current situation would get him banned... and sure enough... he stopped posting about football for a while.

This is why I think he is trolling for the humor.

That said... we a are a community here and and I'm happy to listen to what people think is best.

Here's a poll. I'm happy to hear your opinions to see how we should proceed
User avatar
Merkin
Posts: 43169
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 10:31 am
Reputation: 1547
Location: UA basketball smells like....victory

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by Merkin »

Does ignore not work?

But then again, if people quote the troll it does not.
User avatar
dovecanyoncat
Posts: 16671
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:16 pm
Reputation: 2122
Location: Old Farts and Golf Carts

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by dovecanyoncat »

It's not nearly funny enough to warrant tolerance.
“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

~ Wilhoit's Law
User avatar
pc in NM
Posts: 5461
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2014 6:33 am
Reputation: 649
Location: Roswell, NM

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by pc in NM »

Merkin wrote: Sat Mar 02, 2024 11:24 am Does ignore not work?

But then again, if people quote the troll it does not.
Trolls depend upon feedback, and they don't care what it is! In fact, the more they provoke anger, the better for their "game"!

Every time someone comments on a troll they are rewarding him/her, and insuring more trolling will follow.
“If you have the choice between humble and cocky, go with cocky. There's always time to be humble later, once you've been proven horrendously, irrevocably wrong.”

― Kinky Friedman
User avatar
Chicat
Posts: 46463
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:19 pm
Reputation: 3872
Location: Your mother's basement

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by Chicat »

Good news! Today’s win means Captain Cockbreath will be banning himself for a few days.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
User avatar
U.P. Zona Fan
Posts: 2647
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 9:57 pm
Reputation: 408
Location: Big bay, MI

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by U.P. Zona Fan »

We just need him back to tell us all why we are going to lose 3 in a row and get a 5 seed then lose to Indiana st.
Arizona State might have the most surprisingly anemic history in men's basketball of any program that you might think is better than it is.
-Norlander.
User avatar
dovecanyoncat
Posts: 16671
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:16 pm
Reputation: 2122
Location: Old Farts and Golf Carts

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by dovecanyoncat »

Chicat wrote: Sat Mar 02, 2024 2:24 pm Good news! Today’s win means Captain Cockbreath will be banning himself for a few days.
He either self-bans or Enfuego will pay for the ban.
“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

~ Wilhoit's Law
Postmaster
Posts: 3457
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2017 3:25 pm
Reputation: 335

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by Postmaster »

Personally,
I’m more offended by some of the responses to the troll(s).
I’d like to see a little less of the personal attacks.
The number of posters seems to be dwindling so I hate to see fellow Arizona fans leave.

Also, are you talking permanent ban or a suspension?

I’m on an MLB board and they suspend people several times before a permanent ban.
User avatar
Chicat
Posts: 46463
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2014 12:19 pm
Reputation: 3872
Location: Your mother's basement

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by Chicat »

Postmaster wrote: Tue Mar 05, 2024 5:28 pm Personally,
I’m more offended by some of the responses to the troll(s).
I’d like to see a little less of the personal attacks.
Part of the reason for banning a troll is because of the responses. The reason a troll posts the way they do is to disrupt the board and get people to react negatively.

Banning a troll eliminates the responses you may be offended by. And the poster we are talking about is not an Arizona fan. He has all but admitted that.
Of the 12 coaches, Rush picked the one whose fans have the deepest passion, the longest memories, the greatest lung capacity and … did I mention deep passion?
User avatar
dovecanyoncat
Posts: 16671
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2016 12:16 pm
Reputation: 2122
Location: Old Farts and Golf Carts

Re: Banning trolls? Funny or not?

Post by dovecanyoncat »

While it's true that absolute ignorance eventually starves the troll, why should the onus be on the entire forum body to undertake a protracted rectification of just one asshole? It's ergonomically ludicrous.

Image
“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition …There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

~ Wilhoit's Law
Post Reply