These are not mutually exclusive statements.
You obviously know what a troll is. And you are in fact trolling this very forum.
ALL of the terms? How about the “Don’t be a Jerk” rule? Fits everything, really.
Stating “It’s troll feeding time, and I’m hungry!” in a thread? Pretty obvious.
Give it up. Seriously. You look like a douche.
Not really. I’d rather you report such violations when you notice them. Moderators aren’t on here 24/7. We really try to do our best.
I’d actually cut him slack on that one. Looks to me like he was just being sarcastic: “Debate with you? But I’m a fuckin’ TROLL, remember?”
Exactly.
In the future, you should let me write all your posts for you.
We give warnings and mod notes to people who insult other posters outside of the BBQ Pit. But we do depend on posters to report insults, because we can’t be everywhere. If an insult post is not reported we may not see it. And of course your opinions on what constitutes an insult might differ from the opinions of the moderators.
We do enforce the rule against direct personal insults outside the Pit when they are reported to us. In enforcing the rules, we do look at a general pattern of behavior in deciding on a response. A first offense may receive a Moderator Note instead of a formal warning. If a poster is a repeat offender, that may be escalated to a Warning for subsequent offenses.
Your general pattern of posting frequently shows an intent to get people riled up. Hence the conclusion that you are intentionally trolling.
And your general proposition is nonsense. Just because we may let instances of jaywalking slide, doesn’t mean we are not justified in issuing a speeding ticket to someone who blows by us honking his horn and shouting “look at me, I’m speeding!”
[Moderator Note]
Insults are not permitted in ATMB. Don’t do this again.
The portion of the agreement dealing with trolling is implemented in the Pit rules:
I’ve always applied a Pit rule, as opposed to those applicable to the entire board, if there is a rule on point, under the doctrine of generalia specialibus non derogant.
I’ll let **Miller **speak for himself on the specifics of this one.
“Unpopular opinions,” of course, are not a reason in themselves for banning. It is possible to state and argue unpopular opinions without doing so in a deliberately inflammatory manner. There are quite a few posters who have unpopular opinions here who have not been warned for trolling (although we do sometimes get calls from other posters to ban them because they do feel they are trolling). We do make a pretty strong effort to allow the expression of divergent opinions here.
Like the Stormfronters who visited here with the specific intention to troll while espousing sincerely held unpopular opinions.
Rand Rover said:
Isn’t that like walking up to a cop and saying, “I’ve got weed in my pocket.”
It’s not possession in and of itself, but it sure constitutes probable cause.
Similarly, stating that you are trolling is admitting that you are violating the rules.
I guess we should believe him when he says he isn’t breaking the rules, but disbelieve him when he says he is.
Riiiight.
From the registration agreement.
I think adding what I quoted from Colibri to the part I bolded in the registration agreement would help to clarify things.
To me the pit thread “All religious people should be executed” is pretty inflammatory and to me it seems it is only to piss off religious people but the part I bolded in Colibri’s quote ramps down the inflammatory-iness of the thread because I have read the thread and the OP is genuinely arguing the position.
This is the sentence from the OP which makes me think that he isn’t just trolling.
This sentence,
which is in the same paragraph in the registration agreement as the part I quoted above, seems to me to clearly say that posting thread titles such as “All religious people should be executed” is not cool. So maybe more clarification is in order. Maybe adding something on the lines of, “it’s ok for hypotheticals of non-posters” or some such. An example could be, “What would the world be like if I killed X person?” or “What would the world be like if there were no religious people?” but the thread title, “All religious people should be executed” clearly to me is against the registration agreement or is “all religious people” to large of a group to count and is not indiviual enough?
Missed edit window.
To clarify my post above, as it is a little confusing even to me, is that according to the registration agreement I think the thread itself is fine but the thread title is not and a little more clarification in the registration agreement might help out people and it could curtail these, “What is trolling?” threads asking “is it this?” “or this?” “or this?” “or this blue elephant over here?”
Better than punching someone in the face for it.
Exactly. It’s still trolling even when you actually believe the unpopular statements, if your specific intention in posting them is to stir people up.
Actually, the OP of that thread was eventually warned (here) for trolling when he admitted in another thread that he was posting for his own amusement.
Might wanna check that again.