# How should the Pit be changed, if at all? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [July 19, 2021, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859 "2021-07-19T23:19:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 301
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2021, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/301 "2021-07-23T20:46:02Z")
> [@mordecaiB](#): > > Unless I missed it, you didn’t tell us how many posters were named in that 500 posts so your numbers don’t really tell us anything. Even if only 100 people were named as trolls in those 500 posts, your “trolldar” is worth crap. Twenty five percent success rating is a failure in any class. And you still need to show that those banned were banned because of the troll thread and not because their posts were flagged. And unless the mods specifically noted they were banned for trolling they could just as easily have been socks. As far as I know, socks get cornfielded, not trolls. The only comment I have seen from a mod about the troll thread helping, the number is referred to as a few or some. Can’t add? Someone did and came up with 39, which also means I have zero idea where you are coming up with the 25% figure (the banned/total ratio was 23/39, which is 59%. Rest of your post is a strawman because the question was whether the thread was steering nominess away from the board, and not whether the thread’s “targets” were correctly identified. Nnon-bannees don’t count towards the 59%, tho I will note some of the longer-term ones have been suspended. I’d also say chronic socks can’t be double-counted in the way you are suggesting because we wouldn’t know for sure they were a sock until their banning w/ the socking label (note that often they would indeed qualify as trocks, based on the mod labels in question-non-trolling socks likely don’t get noticed by the mods.or anyone if they keep a low profile). **YWTF** as discussed upthread actually quit right after being modded, note (and not from being mentioned in the thread 5 months earlier, thus their behavior was by definition not squeaky-clean by any stretch). **Harrington** might qualify as someone who was pissed off by the pitting and left soon after, but, [based on his behavior](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/trolls-r-us-redux/913349/441) he’d have an argument that it was deserved (judge for yourself). In terms of questionable behavior, the target rate seemed pretty high to me (as I said only one seemed to have been unfairly chosen, in a one line post where the target was never discussed again). Someone doesn’t necessarily need to be banned for their behavior to qualify for the thread. [Coke to **thorny\_locust**] --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859)._