What does a troll really want?

[_honorentheos]

What can I say. The chaotic neutral gods be damned.

[_Lemmie]

What can I say. The chaotic neutral gods be damned.

We are verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves. (I'm the redhead.)

[_Dr. Shades]

It looks like people are waiting for me to chime in. So I will. Forgive me if it's taken a while, but I wanted to thoroughly read every post in every relevant thread to prevent myself from making any rash decisions.

To start off, EAllusion has captured all of my feelings on this matter perfectly. It's uncanny; it's like we're sharing a hive mind or something. If you've read his posts on this matter, then you've read mine. Even so, I thought this part was especially noteworthy:

There is a blurry line between trolling to derail and just saying stupidly reasoned things that a crowd doesn't like to hear that can be difficult to navigate.

Indeed. To illustrate the moderator dilemma even further, have a look at this fantastic quote from beastie earlier in the thread, emphasis added:

But at some point, [mentalgymnast] decided he was just going to believe. It was better for his life.

I think it was after that decision that his posting behavior gradually began veering in this direction. I think that he is so determined to justify his decision to just believe, no matter what, that he just wants to shut down the information that troubles him.

That's the best analysis of mentalgymnast's behavior I've ever read. But it opens up another line of questioning: Does mentalgymnast even realize that that's what he's doing, or that that's the subconscious motivation that's driving him to do what he does?

If he knows not what he does, does he deserve more patience from the people with whom he interacts, sort of like how, uh, cognitively-challenged kids are granted a free pass for their random verbal outbursts in the classroom, while the neuro-normal kids are immediately chided?

Now that that groundwork has been laid, here are my thoughts on this matter. I won't put mentalgymnast on the queue just yet, because unlike Tobin, his Tobin Syndrome posts have been directed almost solely at grindael, for the reasons beastie posted. grindael's posts constituted the greatest threat to mentalgymnast's delicate mental balancing act (with a nod to Curt van den Heuvel), so grindael's posts received the most attention from mentalgymnast. In other words, mentalgymnast's actions didn't quite rise to the level of "chronic." Enough to drive people crazy, perhaps, but not to the level of chronic-ness that Tobin achieved.

You'll probably disagree, but I think, in my heart of hearts, that mentalgymnast finally has his grindael obsession out of his system. Sure, he posted a grievance thread within 24 hours of being asked not to, but he did indeed refrain from Tobin Syndroming within grindael's own thread(s), just like he said he would. I think I'll take him at his word for now until given a reason not to in the future.

MENTALGYMNAST:

If you're reading this, it will be immensely helpful if, in addition to staying out of grindael's threads AND refraining from starting grievance threads, you ensure that your posts within OTHER people's threads are free from the Tobin Syndrome from now on. How to do this, you ask? Here's how: When responding to someone, don't theorize about what intellectual sin or shortcoming the person's post might hypothetically suffer from. Either point out the specific sin or shortcoming that actually, literally, quantifiably, does indeed exist, or hold your peace.* Otherwise it becomes nothing more than insinuation calculated to harass and annoy. Think about it: How many times did your mere insinuations drive grindael up the wall compared to the number of actual falsehoods in his research, intentional or not, that you truly did identify and point out? What's the numerical ratio?

Or perhaps try this: When you make a post, examine your intent. If your intent is to request clarification, add to, or further enlighten, then go ahead and click "Submit." If your intent is to accuse or to force your respond-ee to justify him- or herself, then do NOT click "Submit."

Follow those guidelines and I'm confident your posts will be free of The Tobin Syndrome. If you're unable to, then I'm afraid I'll have to defer to everyone else and place your posts into the moderator queue.

EVERYONE ELSE:

Here's another thing EAllusion said:

I should add that I think people who respond to posters like MG by engaging in vigilante rule-breaking in order to bring a dose of reverse justice should probably also be queued if they don't knock it off after being warned.

He makes a fantastic point. Responding to trolling (intentional or not) with rule-breaking is NEVER the proper response and, while understandable, tends only to agitate the situation further. Instead of getting angry, give this response a try: "In that case, mentalgymnast, show me specifically how and where I am wrong." Sure, grindael tried that once before and it didn't work, but by the mouths of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

Second, I respectfully request that you remember beastie's words and consider the fact that there's a chance that he simply knows not what he does. Let's face it: When a true believer encounters quality research of the caliber that grindael treats us to, what else can he say? And what else can the rest of us expect from believers?

Third, there's a good chance that mentalgymnast is unintentionally doing us a favor by showcasing the true believer's mindset when faced with disconfirming information. If that's the case, then perhaps we can become just a little less angry with him when he posts what he posts.

Fourth, please don't allow yourself to be "triggered" by the mere sight of his username (not that that usually happens, but just in case). If he makes a post, please take a virtual step back and ask yourself if he's really, truly trolling, or if this one is genuinely sincere. . . or, at least, is no more trolling than anyone else's posts.

Now, let's discuss the fact that you are angry with me right now over the fact that I'm not putting mentalgymnast on the moderator queue just yet. I know what you're thinking, and in response let me quote one of EAllusion's other comments:

Part of my hesitation is that I absolutely do not favor moderating anyone simply because another poster, no matter how well liked, threatens to quit if we do not do so. It sends the wrong message and can lead to mob impingement on free expression.

That's right. Allowing our hands to be forced by people's departure implies that some posters are more valued than others, and that's absolutely NOT a road I dare go down. That's a sure road to Mormon Dialogue & Discussion-style moderation, and a board like that already exists.

But never fear, if mentalgymnast posts one more blatantly** Tobin Syndrome-esque post, then he'll go right into the moderator queue posthaste.

Whew! Still with me? If so, then last of all, here's something from Xenophon:

As an aside, has there ever been discussion about expanding the mod list? Are we just afraid of too heavy a hand or too many cooks in the kitchen? It just feels that 2 mods that work full time on other things may not be enough to handle the load. I will obviously defer to their judgment on that matter though.

Heh, I would LOVE to have more than one other moderator. Experience has shown, however, that few people want to do it, and among those who do, I'm not always successful in turning them into clones of me.

*But in the interests of free speech, if you truly must comment, then start a different thread.
**As defined by me.

[_Res Ipsa]

Dr. Shades, I’m not angry with your reckon at all. I think it was a tough call for all the reasons you outlined. It has always seemed to me that you go to great lengths to make careful, reasoned decisions. And whether or not I would have reached a different decision, this is another one of those careful, reasoned decisions.

Thanks

[_honorentheos]

Seems reasonable, Dr. Shades, and the time taken to explain your thinking is a testament to your commitment to free speech and transparency. Much deserved kudos to you and EA.

I'm guessing far fewer posters read here than in the Terrestrial forum, so perhaps it deserves to be posted there since I doubt most of the participants directly concerned read our political ramblings on the reg.

[_honorentheos]

Oh, and Res Ipsa raised his hand volunteering to be a mod.

Ok, wishful thinking on my part as to who might make a good addition to you and EA since you brought it up.

[_Jersey Girl]

Oh, and Res Ipsa raised his hand volunteering to be a mod.

Ok, wishful thinking on my part as to who might make a good addition to you and EA since you brought it up.

He only did that to compete with your raised hand.

[_Dr. Shades]

I'm guessing far fewer posters read here than in the Terrestrial forum, so perhaps it deserves to be posted there since I doubt most of the participants directly concerned read our political ramblings on the reg.

Good point; I'll do that now.

And thanks to the two of you for the very kind words. :-)

[_Res Ipsa]

Oh, and Res Ipsa raised his hand volunteering to be a mod.

Ok, wishful thinking on my part as to who might make a good addition to you and EA since you brought it up.

Nuh uhhh. What sane person wants that job?

I’m a mod at postmormon, and when the site reopens I’ll be back on the job.

[_honorentheos]

Oh, and Res Ipsa raised his hand volunteering to be a mod.

Ok, wishful thinking on my part as to who might make a good addition to you and EAllusion since you brought it up.

Nuh uhhh. What sane person wants that job?

I’m a mod at postmormon, and when the site reopens I’ll be back on the job.

Sigh.

If I say I've only ever endorsed one other candidate and that was EA could you be persuaded?