# asahi's warning **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [February 4, 2019, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954 "2019-02-04T17:05:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/101 "2019-02-05T21:42:07Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > If there is a new definition of trolling that I have missed, I welcome the correction. It’s not new. My understanding is that this has always been the case: > [@Bone](#): > > Warnable trolling need not be insincere on this board. ---
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/102 "2019-02-05T21:44:32Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > I think it somewhat comes into play. > > If a belief is not held sincerely, _anywhere_ you post it is trolling. > > If a belief is held sincerely, but is something you know may antagonize people, then you still have a duty to be judicious. There is no obligation _never_ to offend people, but you should restrict expression of such views to where they are on-topic. If you keep on about it all the time, and keep derailing threads with it, or in some sense post _principally_ to antagonize people rather than make a relevant point, it’s still trolling even if the view is sincerely held. Agreed. I don’t know if I’m arguing more against **UltraVires** or more against the board’s definition, as written. Maybe an ATMB discussion is in order. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/103 "2019-02-05T21:51:51Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > I stand to be corrected, but my understanding is that “sincere trolling” is an oxymoron. Then stand: trolling isn’t about saying lies to deliberately rile people up; trolling is about deliberately riling people up. I believe that the US has an almost religious reverence for the military, and that this attitude does not serve us well at all. However, I recognize that few folks share this belief of mine, so I mostly stay quiet about it. If I went into threads about military service and dropped cryptic comments about how, “Where’s your respect for garbagemen?” or “Whoopee, you can shoot people, have a medal,” that would be about the most obnoxious way possible for me to phrase my sincere belief. It wouldn’t be an effort to open conversation about how we should regard military work; it would just be using my beliefs to shit on people, confuse them and anger them, and then feel amused and superior at their bewildered fury. That’d be trolling with sincere beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/104 "2019-02-05T21:57:29Z")
> [@GreysonCarlisle](#): > > Agreed. I think you were correct to say sincerity is irrelevant in the sense that the ultimate test is always whether the principal intent was to antagonize. But viewing the sincere/insincere cases separately maybe sheds some light for UltraVires on why it makes sense to frame it that way. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/105 "2019-02-05T22:15:56Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Then stand: trolling isn’t about saying lies to deliberately rile people up; trolling is about deliberately riling people up. > > I believe that the US has an almost religious reverence for the military, and that this attitude does not serve us well at all. However, I recognize that few folks share this belief of mine, so I mostly stay quiet about it. > > If I went into threads about military service and dropped cryptic comments about how, “Where’s your respect for garbagemen?” or “Whoopee, you can shoot people, have a medal,” that would be about the most obnoxious way possible for me to phrase my sincere belief. It wouldn’t be an effort to open conversation about how we should regard military work; it would just be using my beliefs to shit on people, confuse them and anger them, and then feel amused and superior at their bewildered fury. > > That’d be trolling with sincere beliefs. It could possibly be off-topic or threadshitting in certain instances, but if it was on point, say a thread about why veterans should get 100% free healthcare, and you said something along the lines of “Good for you. You did 4 years at Ft. Bragg marching and drinking beer. Why are you different than a garbage man?” and you did that consistently throughout relevant threads, I am not at all seeing the problem. Should, once you recognize that you are a significant minority, just keep your yap shut? It is trolling to express a far minority viewpoint? Or can you only express it a couple of times and then shut up? I disagree, unless you are bringing it in to unrelated threads. But, yes, we could all express our views in a more courteous and respectful manner, but heretofore this ruling, that has not been a rule, and would require a sea change in the way GD is moderated. Based upon the responses, however, I’m still not sure if it was the sentiment or the word that was moderated. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/106 "2019-02-05T22:17:08Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > It’s not new. My understanding is that this has always been the case: Your own prior post from this thread is not a very good cite. The rule that was posted earlier seems to contradict this. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/107 "2019-02-05T22:24:33Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > And in this case, you think the rhetoric not sufficient to warrant a warning. In this regard, I’m not sure why the fact that it was satire is relevant then. Wouldn’t this same spectrum exist sans the element of satire? Or do you think satire shifts to a more expansive view of what is acceptable? I thought we’d pretty much narrowed the issue down to the warning being based on the vocabulary used in this satire. And thus the question of whether there exists some range of vocabulary (such as “negro”) that is unacceptable if used as an unironic racist epithet, but which is not so inflammatory that it is disallowed even in a satiric mockery of racism. Essentially, I see your position as wanting to elevate “negro” to taboo status, because you think it’s too difficult discern satirical/nonsatirical usage. I disagree, I don’t think that it’s difficult to recognize satire, and I think we should only narrow the range of permitted speech if there is a compelling need to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/108 "2019-02-05T22:24:47Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > If a belief is not held sincerely, _anywhere_ you post it is trolling. If I don’t like peanut butter but post online that I do, that’s trolling??? > [@](#): > > If a belief is held sincerely, but is something you know may antagonize people, then you still have a duty to be judicious…If you keep on about it all the time, and keep derailing threads with it, or in some sense post _principally_ to antagonize people rather than make a relevant point, it’s still trolling even if the view is sincerely held. Agreed. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/109 "2019-02-05T22:32:59Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > If I don’t like peanut butter but post online that I do, that’s trolling? No, but since you’re you’re posting _this_ just to antagonize me…🙂 ---
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/110 "2019-02-05T22:34:07Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Your own prior post from this thread is not a very good cite. The rule that was posted earlier seems to contradict this. The same debate has been going on since at least 2008. The [Two and a Half Inches of Fun: can’t we just ban his troll ass and be done with it?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=475038) thread might shed some light. Particularly [post 35](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=9989221&postcount=35). > [@Gary Robson](#): > > Passively holding an opinion (or stating it in a manner appropriate to the forum) is fine. Aggressively blasting out that opinion and intentionally phrasing it in such a manner as to piss people off is not fine. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/111 "2019-02-05T22:56:14Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > If asahi had used the n-word instead of “negro”, would that change anyone’s view? No. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/112 "2019-02-05T23:01:08Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > I’m confused about the definition of trolling. I thought it was when you, say, went on Planned Parenthood’s website chat room (if there is such a thing) and even though you were pro-choice or really didn’t even care about abortion and you start calling them baby killers or some other invective simply to cause problems and get a rise out of them. > > I thought that if, in the above example, that you were pro-life and you really did think of abortion as baby killing, then your post on that board would not be trolling. Am I mistaken? Here is what the actual rules say (some of this was only partially quoted upthread): > [@](#): > > Hate speech, insults, and purposely inflammatory remarks (i.e., trolling) will not be tolerated. > [@](#): > > **Trolls and trolling** - Do not accuse other posters of trolling or being a troll. If you suspect someone is trolling or is a troll, please report them. Identifying a troll is a question of motivations, which aren’t objectively verifiable. There really is no “bright line” that distinguishes a troll from someone who expresses an unpopular opinion forcefully. It’s ultimately a judgement call if a particular poster is doing one versus the other. Do not troll. Trolling is posting solely for the purpose of riling others up. To use your examples, the first example (insincere just to rile people up) is clearly trolling. Your second example, where the poster in question really believes what they are posting, isn’t so clear. And this is where the last line in the rules matters - “Trolling is posting solely for the purpose of riling others up.” And this is where motivation comes into play. If the poster in question is sincere and really wants to discuss the issue, then it isn’t trolling. However, if the poster knows that the post will rile people up, and they post anyway, that is a form of trolling. If you go to a pro-choice board where you know everyone is pro-choice and you know that you aren’t going to change their opinions, and, as a pro-lifer, you post what you actually believe anyway just because you hate them and want to get them all stirred up, that is also trolling. It’s the intent to rile people up that makes it trolling. Insincerity is not a requirement for trolling. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/113 "2019-02-05T23:04:19Z")
> [@GreysonCarlisle](#): > > That’s ridiculous. > > Suppose that a poster sincerely believes that pro-choicers are complicit in murdering babies. How many times could he append _baby-killer_ to posters’ names before he becomes a troll? There’s a difference between that and what **asahi** did, but I’ll point it out again - **asahi** wasn’t directing his satire at any poster on this board, but at an outsider. ---
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/114 "2019-02-05T23:25:06Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > There’s a difference between that and what **asahi** did, but I’ll point it out again - **asahi** wasn’t directing his satire at any poster on this board, but at an outsider. Oh, no. I wasn’t comparing the two, just making an example for my argument that sincerity isn’t a requirement for trolling. I don’t think that **asahi** was trolling, either. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/115 "2019-02-05T23:29:29Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > Your second example, where the poster in question really believes what they are posting, isn’t so clear. And this is where the last line in the rules matters - “Trolling is posting solely for the purpose of riling others up.” And this is where motivation comes into play. If the poster in question is sincere and really wants to discuss the issue, then it isn’t trolling. However, if the poster knows that the post will rile people up, and they post anyway, that is a form of trolling. If you go to a pro-choice board where you know everyone is pro-choice and you know that you aren’t going to change their opinions, and, as a pro-lifer, you post what you actually believe anyway just because you hate them and want to get them all stirred up, that is also trolling. > > It’s the intent to rile people up that makes it trolling. Insincerity is not a requirement for trolling. It seems like under that example, if a poster here said that he supports President Trump and supports the construction of a border wall, that he would be guilty of trolling. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/116 "2019-02-05T23:32:59Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Your own prior post from this thread is not a very good cite. The rule that was posted earlier seems to contradict this. I mean, granted I am somewhat of an authority on the matter. Here are a few more: > [@Playing Devil's Advocate](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/playing-devils-advocate/822716/34): > > Trolling is when one posts solely for the purpose of riling others up. > [@Terms of Service and FAQ](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/terms-of-service-and-faq/823562/2): > > Trolling is posting solely for the purpose of riling others up. > [@Revised Forum Rules for the BBQ Pit: read this before posting](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/revised-forum-rules-for-the-bbq-pit-read-this-before-posting/487209/1): > > By trolling, we mean posting of inflammatory comments solely to get a rise out of people. > [@Is it at any time permissible to argue what you don't believe on the SDMB?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-at-any-time-permissible-to-argue-what-you-dont-believe-on-the-sdmb/787993/2): > > What is NOT permitted, however, is the choosing of sides and arguments solely for the purposes of stirring up trouble and causing hard feelings. That would be trolling. Making an argument just to cause commotion is strongly contraindicated here. Nothing about sincerity there. As to your example about the border wall…it’s kind of silly. We have extensive discussions about the wall with people able to express their views without being admonished for trolling. Your observation is contradicted quite clearly. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2019, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/117 "2019-02-05T23:40:01Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I mean, granted I am somewhat of an authority on the matter. Here are a few more: > > Nothing about sincerity there. > > As to your example about the border wall…it’s kind of silly. We have extensive discussions about the wall with people able to express their views without being admonished for trolling. Your observation is contradicted quite clearly. I understand that it is not modded, but under your “sincere trolling” rule it could be. The sincere trolling rule, which before today was foreign to me, seems to say that you may not hold a minority viewpoint, or that you may hold it so long as you don’t say it too much or too forcefully. I understand also the conundrum expressed in the previous rule: that the mods cannot tell if some extreme viewpoint is real or is simple trolling so sometimes you err on the side of trolling. But your rule has no bounds which can be recognized. How does arguing for Trump’s wall not fall within the confines of the rule? A poster knows that 95+ percent of posters here not only oppose the wall, but viscerally opposes it. Isn’t any further argument simply an attempt to get a rise out of other posters, even if sincere? ETA: Your further cites do not support your rule. If I am arguing a position, I am not doing it solely to incite others, even though others may be so incited. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2019, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/118 "2019-02-06T00:00:57Z")
First, there is no “sincere trolling rule”. Second, there is an element of judgment to this as is stated explicitly in the rule: > [@](#): > > Identifying a troll is a question of motivations, which aren’t objectively verifiable. There really is no “bright line” that distinguishes a troll from someone who expresses an unpopular opinion forcefully. It’s ultimately a judgement call if a particular poster is doing one versus the other. Third, we do not err on the side of trolling. If anything, given that warnings for trolling make up around 6.5% of total warnings, I’d say that most posters would think we don’t give warnings for trolling enough. * * * And on that note, as I said in post #99, I’ve thought about it. I’ll rescind the warning, though somewhat reluctantly. I have my doubts, but given the comments here in this thread and ashai’s posting in this thread, I’ll choose to construe the comment in a more favorable light. Please be more judicious in the future to avoid potential misunderstanding. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2019, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/119 "2019-02-06T00:02:16Z")
> [@pool](#): > > I’m not a super fan of the poster but yeah I think this warning was unjustified. Cosigned. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2019, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954/120 "2019-02-06T00:05:23Z")
[Good job, **Bone**.](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=21472348&postcount=385) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/asahis-warning/828954.md?page=7)