Are Trolls good or bad for a forum?

[yoder]

I should have this in the O/T section, but what the hell...I'm breaking the rules. Serious question though, help me out here. I'm all about the 1st Amendment and haven't banned a single poster, aside from obvious spammers. I'm all for arguments and banter, it's good entertainment. Yet I don't want things to get to a point where people don't want to come here anymore. There are a lot of other forums out there, but you guys (and gal) make this place something unique and special.

With that said, if there are certain people that are obviously impacting the forum in a negative way, would it be diplomatic to put it up to a vote as to whether that person stays or goes? Or is that going too far?

Let me know what you think.

[c_hawkbob]

I put "cant decide" but I'm not really at all conflicted about it. Truth is I think they're terrible but it's not a problem because we have an ignore function.

[Futureite]

So I post here once a week, maybe. And every person that disagrees with anything I post takes it to an ultra personal level. You are going to have these people either way, and I watch the same people use the same tacyics with longterm posters. If you believe it's detrimental for your forum, by all means cancel my account. But I have come to the point where I am not going to ignore personal attacks simply because I call RW a 10-12 range QB or any other number of opinions that I hold. These opinions are ALL very close to the mean.

I admit at times I state these opinions in inscindiary terms, with the same fervor that you all address our team, but that is going to happen regardless of how hard I attempt to avoid it. You get maybe 1 equally inscindiary response on my end for every "Kaperdouche". We are football fans. That is going to happen.

I have no problem if you want to cancel me. None. If your board is entirely about celebrating your team, fine. Or even if it respects outside opinions but you do not like how I state them, that is fine to. I began posting here 3-4 yrs ago because I liked the variance of opinions and the liberal nature of the board. It is better than most.

At the end of the day though I am not going to back away from my opinions, and prob will not back away from people that continue to insult me on a personal level despite my extending the Olive Branch to them. I understand you love Russell Wilson, Richard Sherman et al, but if you hold such a high standard to such players, what is wrong with someone offering a view which contradicts it?

Lastly, please undersand that in this line of work that I do (which by the way, I hate), I am programmed to disect the meaning of individual words to cite seamingly meaningless facts. To some of you, it may appear to be "waffling", but it is not. It's the way everyone works in what I do. There is no intention whatsoever to cause any problems by how I state my opinions here. I could stare things in a less argumentative tome at times, but after stating I'd try years ago and failing to follow through, this is obviously still part of who I am (unfortunately).

Hope I stated my side well, at least.

[burrrton]

I think trolls are bad, but I also think there's a very high bar to being a troll of the caliber that deserves banning.

As Bob says, we've got an ignore function for when you really can't take the inanity anymore.

[FolkCrusader]

Trolls can completely distract the conversation and make it unpleasant for people that just want to discuss football. Typically that is their goal too goad, make fun of, and rile people up to the point that they lose their cool. The problem is that in a large enough crowd no clear definition of a "troll" will emerge.

Having moderated several forums in the past my only advice is, use your best judgement. If a person is sincerely arguing a point, but that point is unpopular that is not trolling. Bringing up that point again and again ad nauseum may be. An insincere argument meant to gain a reaction is trolling, but if they only bring it up once, let people respond, and let it go then it's a harmless one. To me the only troll that is harmful to a forum are the ones that bring up insincere arguments over and over. It's like they have a recipe book for how to piss people off and they just keep cooking.

Of course exactly how harmful they are, one has to judge for themselves. When good posters, posters that contribute meaningful discussion leave the forum, then harm has come to your site.

[monkey]

Ignore function is fine, to a certain point, but when everyone is quoting the idiot troll in their posts, and when everyone is so busy responding to and feeding the troll that the actual subject of the thread has long been lost, and when every thread gets derailed by a troll, so that it becomes nearly impossible to actually carry on a legitimate football conversation, without everyone getting sidetracked trying to straighten out the incredibly stupid opinions of one moronic troll...then the ignore function is completely useless.
The ignore function would be fine if people would STOP FEEDING THE TROLL, and STOP QUOTING THE MORON!

I stopped posting here during the off season, and stuck to Field Gulls, mostly because it seemed as if the entire community here was doing nothing other than responding to the moron troll.

If it weren't for guys like Bob, Burrrton, and Kalibane, I wouldn't have even bothered coming back here, because the troll had so badly infested every thread with his stink that the ignore function did no good whatsoever. Fortunately, his team has become so bad, (leaving him with nothing to crow about, or try to rub our noses in) that his posting and thread starting has slowed down to a trickle.

When I was contributor/moderator at 12SeahawksStreet, I had a simple rule, if the troll was intentionally sidetracking the fun football discussion, I warned him exactly once, then he was gone if he did it again. Permanently.
It's not worth losing people who have come to have fun talking about the SEAHAWKS, (and that is why we are here, lest we forget, this is a SEAHAWS FAN forum!), and so anyone derailing topics with endless criticism of Seahawks players, or ad nauseum discussions of the merits of Colin Kaepernick etc... would get the ban hammer.

[Hawktawk]

Trolls can be fun if they are realists and can accept when they have received a linguistic ass kicking. We currently have one troll as I would describe it. I'm done talking to him although I haven't pushed the ignore button yet. Honestly I dont care. Say what you want.

[obiken]

Its not like the old PI forum where you had Phili 51, Tailgator, ect most of the Trolls I think were weeded out during the change. Actually I cant remember a really intense discussion since the one on drafting Bruce Irvin. Am I wrong? Future is a pain in the neck but not a dagger to the head!

[burrrton]

I wouldn't even call Future a pain in the neck- he's just really bad at arguing and debate. He seems to kinda sorta try, though, which is why I don't think he's at all deserving of a ban.

[savvyman]

Trolls or those posters with opposing viewpoints serve a purpose and add to the community.

As long as no one is threatening another poster then no one should be banned and they should be free to share their opinions.

[obiken]

I agree Savvy, I would add another caveat, as long as they aren't insulting them or calling them names.

Monkey I never saw it that bad in here but I am not in here as much as I used to be. I was never a cheerleader, but I was not a hater. What is there not to like about 2 SB's in a row. Right now is a good time to be a Hawk. 2007, 8, or 9, were not. Outside of Bruce Irvin I never had a major argument with anyone that I can remember. On Irvin I would say that he is not as good as some would like to think or as bad as some would like to hope!

[Vegaseahawk]

I think that our forum members do a good job of policing our jurisdiction. I've never seen anyone really get out of line here. In fact, I love the fact that our leaders on this forum use intelligence to counter trolling. I'm not speaking specifically to Futurites posts, he isn't even a troll, imo. Rather, it's the seldom seen trolls who pop in with outrageous statements the week leading up to the matchup with their team that I'm referring to. I just love the way you guys shred those types. In fact, I'd like to see more of them, just to read the pointed wit that carves these trolls up. To me it's entertaining. As for banning, NO. Let's follow the 1st amendment here, & as long as common sense is the rule. I say that it should be a pretty extreme case to justify banning someone.

[NorthHawk]

I think it's a lot easier countering trolls posts when you've been to the Super Bowl the last 2 years - and should have won both.

But like others have said or alluded to is the difficulty in identifying true trolls.
It seems to me true trolls are usually those that pop in just before a game and make a few inflammatory statements that are clearly designed to get people to react to them and not the content of their claims. They often try to get regular posters banned by making them react outside the bounds of the forum rules.
It's what ruined the PI Forum just before SBXL when some great posters were banned or decided to leave for better pastures.

I welcome fans of other teams visiting as it spices up the forum. Discussing football with them often gives us another angle on what or how our team is progressing as well as how we stack up against other teams. It's pretty easy to begin navel gazing when there is no outside PoV to make us think and there are a few Seahawks posters here that occasionally take a contrarian view which does help, but it's not like an outside or fresh perspective that can cause us to re-examine what we think are truths.

[Zorn76]

1st off - Yoder rocks! Thank you, as always, for creating and running this site, along with Mak.

This is my home site.

I voted "can't decide...", though I think I would've worded the 3rd option as "The 'ignore' button is sufficient."

And the ignore button does help.

I wish everybody here well on a personal level, but a couple of posters I choose not to read. No biggie. Doesn't make them bad people, just don't care for their style.

For those of you that can read this:), I'm just glad we're on the brink of another great season and that the traffic should pick up in here. I purposefully stayed away for a bit since it helps move the offseason along a bit faster.

[Hawktown]

I agree with monkey on this one! The problem lies where a thread gets sidetracked too often and posters quote the trolls so the ones who use the ignore button can't even get away from seeing the nonsense. I'm not for banning really, just for not quoting the guy or letting a thread get so far off track that it is pointless to follow said thread(s). When i first started to go to forums around 2008 or so, I actually had fun with the trolls. It has gotten old to argue the same old crap all the time. Just because I have a certain opinion a person does not like, they make it a point to continually try to single certain posters, or myself, out with anything and everything they can think of to cause a reaction. Whether it is intended for believed troll to get that reaction on purpose or not, it still has the same effect.

My vote, can't decide. I use ignore.

[kalibane]

Honestly don't think he's a troll. He's just a fan who takes his fandom and thus criticism of rival teams way more seriously than he cares to admit. I really think he believes he's doing some kind of service by keeping us "arrogant" hawk fans in check; doesn't realize how nonsensical some of his posts are or how they often times contradict his previous statements. A real troll would either be like Rambo or that other Rams fan who just talk trash and call names or like CP make posts that are insulting but are almost entirely qualitative in nature so you can't prove them wrong outright. The guy who obviously inspired this topic has been making arguments over the past couple years that are so illogical they amuse you more than get under your skin which is the goal of a Troll.

Fascinating case study in my opinion, the way his posts have systematically devolved in quality and ramped up in rhetoric and venom since the end of 2011. Don't think I've quite seen anything quite like it before. And to be so obtuse to bear witness that he has gone from a welcome voice of the "enemy" (even when the 49ers were better than the Hawks) to alienating the vast majority of the members of this message board and chalk it up to some kind of conspiracy theory based on our supposed insecurity instead of the recognizing the obvious, that he is the common denominator. Sure there are some people who just do not want to hear anything anti-hawk but when people like Bob, Zorn and Sis make a conscious decision to not engage and/or avoid his content, you probably should do a little self reflection.

But in answer to the general question, no I don't think actual trolls are good for a forum. It's like click bait headlines on the internet or trash TV. Sure they may grab eyes but it offers nothing of substance. Many of them think that the number of replies they get keeps the site going, but the truth is even though people reply it's not what people actually come here for. Case in point. CP was ghosted from this site after the PI went down. Can you think of a single person who stopped posting once CP wasn't around to rattle cages? I can't.

[Distant Relative]

I don't mind a good troll that has a sense of humor and just good old trash talking before a game and such. It's when they are just plain trying to be a jack ass
and just saying crap that knows will get a rise out of other posters that turns me off. That's why I have 1 Troll on ignore. When I opened this thread I wasn't signed in so ignored trolls post appeared. I found the below sentence interesting.

I began posting here 3-4 yrs ago because I liked the variance of opinions and the liberal nature of the board.

What bothered me most about the PI was they would eventually ban the Trolls but not their IP address(or it seemed) and they would just come back under another handle and
continue trolling.

It is what it is. Still can't wrap my head around why a certain troll spends so much time on this forum.

Classic that he was the second responder to the thread. Now that's some good stuff.

[Hawk Sista]

A differing opinion is always good. We disagree on a lot of things and we are (mostly) all fans of the same team. We couldn't find consensus on what to do with the RW contract and there are differences in how we all see the Kam situation. I find the debates fun, amusing and sometimes I even change my mind after hearing varying points of view.

Rooting for a different team, even a rival, does not a troll make. Persistent goading does, though. Those who find fan forums of rival teams to chop up a game (even get in a few barbs) are ok by me, but the folks who go out of their way to irritate a group of people chatting about a shared interest should be banned, or blocked... not for their different opinion or love of a rival team, but for repeatedly making the conversation less valuable/interesting. I'm a busy lady and I simply don't have the time (or desire) to sift through the BS.

[Futureite]

Honestly don't think he's a troll. He's just a fan who takes his fandom and thus criticism of rival teams way more seriously than he cares to admit. I really think he believes he's doing some kind of service by keeping us "arrogant" hawk fans in check; doesn't realize how nonsensical some of his posts are or how they often times contradict his previous statements. A real troll would either be like Rambo or that other Rams fan who just talk trash and call names or like CP make posts that are insulting but are almost entirely qualitative in nature so you can't prove them wrong outright. The guy who obviously inspired this topic has been making arguments over the past couple years that are so illogical they amuse you more than get under your skin which is the goal of a Troll.

Fascinating case study in my opinion, the way his posts have systematically devolved in quality and ramped up in rhetoric and venom since the end of 2011. Don't think I've quite seen anything quite like it before. And to be so obtuse to bear witness that he has gone from a welcome voice of the "enemy" (even when the 49ers were better than the Hawks) to alienating the vast majority of the members of this message board and chalk it up to some kind of conspiracy theory based on our supposed insecurity instead of the recognizing the obvious, that he is the common denominator. Sure there are some people who just do not want to hear anything anti-hawk but when people like Bob, Zorn and Sis make a conscious decision to not engage and/or avoid his content, you probably should do a little self reflection.

But in answer to the general question, no I don't think actual trolls are good for a forum. It's like click bait headlines on the internet or trash TV. Sure they may grab eyes but it offers nothing of substance. Many of them think that the number of replies they get keeps the site going, but the truth is even though people reply it's not what people actually come here for. Case in point. CP was ghosted from this site after the PI went down. Can you think of a single person who stopped posting once CP wasn't around to rattle cages? I can't.

Well said Kalibane . But I will counter that self reflection goes both ways. I do not think my rating of RW, opinion on the Fail Mary or any number of other topics we have debated are out of line with reality. In fact, as I've stated before, they are pretty close to the national consensus. When I am wrong, as in Tate, I admit it. The problem is, there are so many people that either misquote or misstate something I've posted that they are arguing over fictitious points.

Perfect example: I've never posted RW struggles with a deep ball. Ever. What you were "probably" referring to (in claiming I had) was my comparison of Luck's ability to throw 25 yd comebacks and other downfield throws that Wilson cannot (hense the reason he was a #1 overall pick). That is a typical example of someone here dressing something I posted up and changing it to fit their own agenda.

And to take it further, I could go extend the analysis and state Wilson "could" stick that throw in practice or potentially in a game situation, but he could not do so with near the repetetive accuracy, timing and velosity that Luck does. But in so many people's minds here, that level of detail would be "waffling", "rambling", "contradictory" or "unsupported". Sorry that you feel that way - but this is how arguing is done for any issue where significant amounts of money is involved. So don't blame me if I apply it here, as well.

The posting did start fun. Most of you point to 2012 as the turning point. I will admit most Niner fans assumed our perpetual slot at the top had returned, and we acted arrogant. Conversely, Seattle fans used that Dec 2012 to incite and push back in a way they've never been able to before. I've even read your own reporters speak and write about this. When you push enough, how do you honestly expect people to react??

So, IMO the back and forth is 50/50. It's all fine with me.

[Futureite]

Anyhow, I do not want to insult anyone here. It's very difficult for me to avoid doing that when I feel attacked. I genuinely respect everyone here. Even the people who get under my skin are knowledgable and intelligent (Kalibane) and others that I've appreciated such as Rott are incredibly creative and brilliant. While others still such as River remain incredibly logical in debate where I lose my cool.

I admit I can be a major D. I doubt it'll change at this point. I guess it is what is is, as they say.

[yoder]

Thanks for the input everyone (and the shout out Zorn). Just want to keep this place enjoyable for all!

[LTH]

I think there are different types of trolls... some have an underlying respect... some do not... depends on how the mods react... on .net there are some mods that are really good and some that are just over baring... I personally like intense hard hitting conversations amoung adults and I dont usually take things personally unless of course you talk about truck LOL....just kidding..but I generally think that most people are stupid so trolls dont bother me much...
Mods that want to ban you for using WTF and stuff like irritate me more...

LTH

[kalibane]

Future... the problem with your posts isn't your conclusion. It's the reasoning and analysis that supposedly help you get there. And stop with the hawk fans were not able to push back before stuff... perfect example. Until Harbaugh the Seahawks were pretty much better than the 49ers from the day they moved to the NFC West. The Rams were the other good team here not the Niners. I do agree you thought you were entitled to the division when the niners did get good, but there was no push back. For the most part it was the same kind of analysis that was going on in 2005 and for whatever reason you haven't seemed to handle it so well that people thought the Seahawks were as good or better than the niners even though that ultimately proved to be the case. You may not want to admit it but it was more the arrogance and entitlement of 49er fans that made the rivalry.

If you want to talk about specific arguments go back to the thread they were made in this is not the place for them.

[monkey]

Actually, the problem(s) with his posts are that he endlessly revolves around just a couple hot button topics, (as all trolls do), and that even after being proven to be, irrefutably, incontrovertibly, dead wrong, beyond a shadow of doubt, by reason of overwhelming statistical PROOF, he continues to stand by his moronic takes which are based on nothing more than wishful and delusional thinking, biased eye tests, and blind homerism. Then, when all else fails, after being proven wrong yet again, he simply switches up his wording ever so slightly, so as to claim that wasn't what he meant to say, or he moves the goal posts mid debate, claiming that the new target was really his original target all along.

Honestly, he's just not at all worth reading or responding to in any fashion, because he is NOT debating at all! He is NOT interested in having a football discussion, if he were, then he would be HAVING football conversations. After all, that's what we're all here for. He's NOT interested in that, he's interested in trolling, he's interested in stirring the pot, distracting topics from their intended points, and getting people to respond to the same stupid trollish statements OVER, and bloody OVER again, (which nearly everyone in here has done actually, we've all fed the troll).

[RiverDog]

Great thread, Yoder! You and Mak are the best. This ain't no good 'ole boys club where the only opinions that are published are those that are sanctioned by some self appointed God. You guys take your authority seriously and have used a very measured, rational approach to administering this forum.

Trolls are, by definition, those that author comments with the expressed intent of aggravating the majority of the participants and inflaming opinions. CP Returns from the PI forum is a classic example of a troll. He would throw out back handed compliments and thinly veiled insults, and not just about our team but about our region as well. One post of his that sticks out in my mind was an unsupported opinion where he claimed that the majority of Cowboys fans wished that Drew Bledsoe would take his sorry act "back to eastern Washington", knowing full well that I just happened to hail from the same home town as Bledsoe. I'm not a huge Bledsoe fan, but that's beside the point. He could have said New England or Buffalo, which would be a more logical place to "go back to where he came from", but he knew that if he said eastern Washington that he'd be rubbing my nose in it and get under my skin.

Futureite isn't like that. Yea, he says chit that pizzes me off, particularly the cherry picking he does whenever the topic is about Russell Wilson. But he's not doing it in the same vein as CP did. At least Futureite is up front about it instead of playing this politically correct game of piss in your corn flakes yet stay within the limits of the TOS.

I really don't understand why such good, intelligent posters like Sis, Cbob, and monkey don't even like reading Futureite's comments. You're all VERY well equipped to take this chump to the woodshed, so what are you afraid of? Some of the best entertainment I get in this forum is reading someone like Kalibane's comments in response to a Futureite post. A Futureite post is perhaps the one thing that we can all agree on.

Sometimes we can take this online stuff too seriously. One of the funniest and most truthful comments I've read since I started doing this stuff was at the end of a rather intense exchange between two antagonists that was getting very personal in which one guy ended it by saying "and I typed that with one hand tied behind my back". If we're taking this stuff that seriously, then we really do need to get a life.

[kalibane]

Riv,

I get why they don't read them. Same reason why I stopped taking his posts seriously and why he does toe the trolling line. Take for instance his Richard Sherman stance, which hasn't changed but simply hasn't been debated in a while. He's on that whole, "he doesn't follow the best WR", "He plays a glorified Zone with help from Earl Thomas" train.

Okay fine from an uneducated fan I expect that kind of simplistic logic. But then I went and found a detailed analysis where a site broke down film for the supposed top 10 corners in the league. They analyzed every play where each cornerback was in coverage, whether their receiver was targeted or not and figured out how many times they got beaten, were in good position or had blanket coverage. They did this both for the 2012 and 2013 seasons and Richard Sherman graded out as the best corner each year and explicitly stated that his coverage was better in man concepts than in zone. This breakdown particularly shut down the Patrick Peterson hype and exposed that while insanely gifted he was very inconsistent. But when presented with that kind of insanely detailed research he just acts like it doesn't exist and keeps saying Patrick Peterson is better because he follows the #1 receiver more. Or how he ignored the fact that Belichek kept Revis on the left side of the formation essentially the same % as Richard Sherman last year but didn't knock Revis down for it.

It shows he wasn't really interested in the discussion, he was just interested in running down Richard Sherman because he doesn't like him.

That was about the time I really stopped taking his posts as legitimate healthy football debate. And it's kind of gone down hill since then, especially as it relates to Russell Wilson. So while I'll engage him for fun from time to time. I can completely understand why other people just want to turn him off.

[RiverDog]

Riv,

I get why they don't read them. Same reason why I stopped taking his posts seriously and why he does toe the trolling line. Take for instance his Richard Sherman stance, which hasn't changed but simply hasn't been debated in a while. He's on that whole, "he doesn't follow the best WR", "He plays a glorified Zone with help from Earl Thomas" train.

Okay fine from an uneducated fan I expect that kind of simplistic logic. But then I went and found a detailed analysis where a site broke down film for the supposed top 10 corners in the league. They analyzed every play where each cornerback was in coverage, whether their receiver was targeted or not and figured out how many times they got beaten, were in good position or had blanket coverage. They did this both for the 2012 and 2013 seasons and Richard Sherman graded out as the best corner each year and explicitly stated that his coverage was better in man concepts than in zone. This breakdown particularly shut down the Patrick Peterson hype and exposed that while insanely gifted he was very inconsistent. But when presented with that kind of insanely detailed research he just acts like it doesn't exist and keeps saying Patrick Peterson is better because he follows the #1 receiver more. Or how he ignored the fact that Belichek kept Revis on the left side of the formation essentially the same % as Richard Sherman last year but didn't knock Revis down for it.

It shows he wasn't really interested in the discussion, he was just interested in running down Richard Sherman because he doesn't like him.

That was about the time I really stopped taking his posts as legitimate healthy football debate. And it's kind of gone down hill since then, especially as it relates to Russell Wilson. So while I'll engage him for fun from time to time. I can completely understand why other people just want to turn him off.

I can understand refusing to engage someone you have lost respect for and 'turning him off', but to go so far as to express their displeasure because they saw their comments via someone else's response? I know of a lot of people that hate our current President or former President(s) so much that they can't stand to see or hear them talk and will immediately turn the channel anytime they see their image come across the screen, but it's been my experience that those type of people are extremely biased, ignorant, or both, and the three posters I mentioned do not give me that impression, to the contrary, quite the opposite, which is what makes it so hard for me to understand.

[Oly]

Riv,

I get why they don't read them. Same reason why I stopped taking his posts seriously and why he does toe the trolling line. Take for instance his Richard Sherman stance, which hasn't changed but simply hasn't been debated in a while. He's on that whole, "he doesn't follow the best WR", "He plays a glorified Zone with help from Earl Thomas" train.

Okay fine from an uneducated fan I expect that kind of simplistic logic. But then I went and found a detailed analysis where a site broke down film for the supposed top 10 corners in the league. They analyzed every play where each cornerback was in coverage, whether their receiver was targeted or not and figured out how many times they got beaten, were in good position or had blanket coverage. They did this both for the 2012 and 2013 seasons and Richard Sherman graded out as the best corner each year and explicitly stated that his coverage was better in man concepts than in zone. This breakdown particularly shut down the Patrick Peterson hype and exposed that while insanely gifted he was very inconsistent. But when presented with that kind of insanely detailed research he just acts like it doesn't exist and keeps saying Patrick Peterson is better because he follows the #1 receiver more. Or how he ignored the fact that Belichek kept Revis on the left side of the formation essentially the same % as Richard Sherman last year but didn't knock Revis down for it.

It shows he wasn't really interested in the discussion, he was just interested in running down Richard Sherman because he doesn't like him.

That was about the time I really stopped taking his posts as legitimate healthy football debate. And it's kind of gone down hill since then, especially as it relates to Russell Wilson. So while I'll engage him for fun from time to time. I can completely understand why other people just want to turn him off.

I've typically been more tolerant of fans of other teams, probably in large part because I never try to change their minds. To me, a troll is like what CowboyBoot&Fist was at the PI forum: just there to throw some Molotovs while yelling "Romo for lyfe!" and then running away giggling. Future, like Rambo at the PI, is more just hard-headed homer who forms a biased opinion, cherry picks information to support it (stats and eye-tests are equally okay for them), and never changes it, no matter how good the counterarguments are. And frankly, there are a ton of people who are just like that, even in real life. To me, they go in the "biased idiot" category, not the "troll" one. Although I don't find either worth responding to, I only click the "ignore" button for the trolls.

At the end of the day, even the most biased idiot of the biased idiots can give me something to think about that I didn't before, and it might lead me to look at some other stats/analysis that I never would have thought to do before. But while the idiot might send me on an interesting path, I don't want them to travel with me and fill my ears with inane blather.

[c_hawkbob]

I really don't understand why such good, intelligent posters like Sis, Cbob, and monkey don't even like reading Futureite's comments. You're all VERY well equipped to take this chump to the woodshed, so what are you afraid of?

Not "afraid" of anything. Said my piece to him once (since he has returned to his prior trollish behavior) and i just don't have the time for it any more. I'm glad you enjoy seeing him dressed down, but I can't imagine why anyone bothers.

[RiverDog]

Not "afraid" of anything. Said my piece to him once (since he has returned to his prior trollish behavior) and i just don't have the time for it any more. I'm glad you enjoy seeing him dressed down, but I can't imagine why anyone bothers.

'Afraid' wasn't a good term as I didn't mean to suggest that you or the others were fearful of him or his musings. Perhaps aversive, avoidance, intolerant would be better suited for the discussion, although I don't know if any of those perfectly fit what I was trying to convey, either.

[RiverDog]

I've typically been more tolerant of fans of other teams, probably in large part because I never try to change their minds. To me, a troll is like what CowboyBoot&Fist was at the PI forum: just there to throw some Molotovs while yelling "Romo for lyfe!" and then running away giggling. Future, like Rambo at the PI, is more just hard-headed homer who forms a biased opinion, cherry picks information to support it (stats and eye-tests are equally okay for them), and never changes it, no matter how good the counterarguments are. And frankly, there are a ton of people who are just like that, even in real life. To me, they go in the "biased idiot" category, not the "troll" one. Although I don't find either worth responding to, I only click the "ignore" button for the trolls.

At the end of the day, even the most biased idiot of the biased idiots can give me something to think about that I didn't before, and it might lead me to look at some other stats/analysis that I never would have thought to do before. But while the idiot might send me on an interesting path, I don't want them to travel with me and fill my ears with inane blather.

Yea, I remember "Fister" and "Ramblow" from the old PI forum, along with another guy called Bearman and a Steeler troll or two. They honestly didn't bother me. The only two trolls I've ever encountered since I've started posting in the sports forums 10+ years ago that really got under my skin is CP Returns and the guy obi mentioned, Tailgater, from the PI Husky forum.

But if you ever want to get your blood pressure up, just try engaging in a political discussion, either side of the spectrum. I used to post in the political forums at the PI, but gave it up due to all the venom being exchanged. I don't mind doing it here with people like ObS, Kal, Burrton, et al as we've already established a commonality with our interest in football, in particular Seahawk football, and I consider them friends, but in general, the types of people that post in political forums treat their politics like religious fanatics treat their faith.

[kalibane]

True I try to keep political talk to a minimum but like the stuff we are talking about right now over there is just kind of fun to kick around especially since it's mostly hypothetical.

[Hawk Sista]

RiverDog wrote:I really don't understand why such good, intelligent posters like Sis, Cbob, and monkey don't even like reading Futureite's comments. You're all VERY well equipped to take this chump to the woodshed, so what are you afraid of?

I thought I was clear, RD. For me, putting him on ignore just makes me feel better. The instances when I did engage with him on a subject (like who would stand the test of time better: Kap or RW?) he'd move the target and change the argument as to step out of the way of my retort. I simply haven't the time or the interest to debate (or dress down) a person who I believe isn't worth my time. He's either attempting to get my goat, stupid, blind to the introduction of real evidence, and/or a troll. Why would I spend what little free time I have on that?? There are plenty of friends I see too little of, more golf I could be playing, better books I could read etc. In a nutshell, it is the time it takes away from productive living first and the fact that I'm just happier without him second. Not fear or hate.

Your question actually sort of baffles me, really. I can't for the life of me understand why you'd want to debate the dude and that you would question why Bob, Monkey and I have quit. No offense, Riv - you know I love ya - but you know me well enough to know why, doncha?.

[Feez]

I didn't vote but I think it really should be broken down on a troll by troll basis. some can be entertaining some can be disruptive and are intentionally that way. I think if they are allowed to run rampant they can be detrimental to a forum.

[monkey]

Riv, it's like this, he went from fan of another team, who talked about football and was respectful, to a guy with his proverbial fingers in his ears shouting "la la la la la la., I don't care about your facts!"
A fan of another team, even one I disagree completely with, I will engage and debate with and it is fun. A guy who just repeats the same stupidity no matter how often he has been PROVEN to be wrong, because he's intentionally ignores any counterpoints, is NOT worth my time.
My time is valuable, I'm not going to waste it shouting at someone with their fingers shoved in their ears, not listening to anything other than what they want to hear.

[RiverDog]

I thought I was clear, RD. For me, putting him on ignore just makes me feel better. The instances when I did engage with him on a subject (like who would stand the test of time better: Kap or RW?) he'd move the target and change the argument as to step out of the way of my retort. I simply haven't the time or the interest to debate (or dress down) a person who I believe isn't worth my time. He's either attempting to get my goat, stupid, blind to the introduction of real evidence, and/or a troll. Why would I spend what little free time I have on that?? There are plenty of friends I see too little of, more golf I could be playing, better books I could read etc. In a nutshell, it is the time it takes away from productive living first and the fact that I'm just happier without him second. Not fear or hate.

Your question actually sort of baffles me, really. I can't for the life of me understand why you'd want to debate the dude and that you would question why Bob, Monkey and I have quit. No offense, Riv - you know I love ya - but you know me well enough to know why, doncha?.

I fully understand why you and the others would put him on ignore. But why do you not want to even see his comments as part of a response someone like myself might post? Are they that bad?

I don't have a problem with either action, and so long as you don't insist that I not respond to him, all's good. As you requested, I'll try to edit his remarks when I do choose to respond.

[burrrton]

Riv, it's like this, he went from fan of another team, who talked about football and was respectful, to a guy with his proverbial fingers in his ears shouting "la la la la la la., I don't care about your facts!"

QED:

Please just shut the hell up with your fact citing.

[Hawk Sista]

" I don't have a problem with either action, and so long as you don't insist that I not respond to him, all's good. As you requested, I'll try to edit his remarks when I do choose to respond." River Dog

In fairness, I NEVER "insisted". I requested that you not quote him so that all of us made more content by ignoring him wouldn't have to see his stuff. You are a grown-up, Riv. Do what you do. I can flip past it all, no worries.