NationStates

viewtopic.php?p=34904230#p34904230

Grenartia calling Tars a troll, instead of reporting him for whatever they say is trolling.

I loomed at them viewtopic.php?p=34907102#p34907102

Thanks for the report.

Jakker wrote:I loomed at them viewtopic.php?p=34907102#p34907102

Thanks for the report.

No prob! Uhhhhh...

*Leaves a giant stuffed dog plushie.*

Jakker wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
I'm sorry that my personal life doesn't allow me to respond to your blatant trolling on your time.

The exchange between you two is getting fairly heated, so I'd recommend you two being mindful to not letting things escalate further. Furthermore, if you suspect someone is trolling in the general sense, might make sense to ignore them. If they are trolling in the against forum rules sense, report it.

I'd like a second opinion, please. All of the precedent I'm aware of is that saying somebody is trolling is only actionable when it is posted in isolation, when nothing else of substance is being said.

No warnings, official or unofficial, were handed out. There is nothing to appeal. There is no need for a second opinion.

viewtopic.php?p=34912380#p34912380

Somewhere in this loooooong post Gren continues to call-out Tars for “concern trolling”, without reporting him for apparent “trolling”.

Luminesa wrote:https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=34912380#p34912380

Somewhere in this loooooong post Gren continues to call-out Tars for “concern trolling”, without reporting him for apparent “trolling”.

Again, I thought you had me on your ignore list, Lumi. At this point, I'm starting to think you're maliciously reporting me just to see what you can get to stick.

Also, I'd like to point out that I'm pretty damn certain Moderation wouldn't recognize it as actionable, but unfortunately, there's no better term to describe what I see him doing than "concern trolling".

That long post by Gren is not what the trollnaming rule is meant to prevent. That post addressed a variety of points, many of which were on-topic and had substance.

Whether you agree with Gren's arguments is irrelevant. Either way, points were being argued.

As for the "concern trolling"... One man's "concern trolling" is another man's actual concern. Even if you think it's offensive and misguided, it is still possible that the concern was sincere.

USS Monitor wrote:That long post by Gren is not what the trollnaming rule is meant to prevent. That post addressed a variety of points, many of which were on-topic and had substance.

Whether you agree with Gren's arguments is irrelevant. Either way, points were being argued.

As for the "concern trolling"... One man's "concern trolling" is another man's actual concern. Even if you think it's offensive and misguided, it is still possible that the concern was sincere.

Thank you Monitor. And yes, I foresaw a mod saying that about concern trolling. However, again, I can't think of any better term for it than that. As Moderation knows, no degree of sincerity is a defense for trolling.

USS Monitor wrote:That long post by Gren is not what the trollnaming rule is meant to prevent. That post addressed a variety of points, many of which were on-topic and had substance.

Whether you agree with Gren's arguments is irrelevant. Either way, points were being argued.

As for the "concern trolling"... One man's "concern trolling" is another man's actual concern. Even if you think it's offensive and misguided, it is still possible that the concern was sincere.

I wasn’t addressing those in particular, it was a specific line I probably should have bolded. Not as a way of saying, “Gosh that boat can’t read,” but because Gren did write a lot. I didn’t necessarily agree with their points, no, but that wasn’t my concern, nor was I looking to report them based on whatever valid points they made.

Grenartia wrote:

USS Monitor wrote:That long post by Gren is not what the trollnaming rule is meant to prevent. That post addressed a variety of points, many of which were on-topic and had substance.

Whether you agree with Gren's arguments is irrelevant. Either way, points were being argued.

As for the "concern trolling"... One man's "concern trolling" is another man's actual concern. Even if you think it's offensive and misguided, it is still possible that the concern was sincere.

Thank you Monitor. And yes, I foresaw a mod saying that about concern trolling. However, again, I can't think of any better term for it than that. As Moderation knows, no degree of sincerity is a defense for trolling.

She just said it’s not concern-trolling and explained why.

Luminesa wrote:

Grenartia wrote:
Thank you Monitor. And yes, I foresaw a mod saying that about concern trolling. However, again, I can't think of any better term for it than that. As Moderation knows, no degree of sincerity is a defense for trolling.

She just said it’s not concern-trolling and explained why.

I know. I wasn't arguing with her. I simply clarified why I called it concern trolling, and why sincerity doesn't matter to why I call something concern trolling.

I entirely recognize that it isn't actionable trolling by Moderation's standards. But it is by mine, and Max has stated he wants terrible ideas called out on this site. And keeping me from calling concern trolling what it is (as you're trying to do here) hinders me from calling it out as the terrible idea it is.

Edit: And that's as far as I'm going to continue spamming Moderation to respond to you. If you'd like to dispute this further, you can unblock me from your TG box.

Lumi, you reported the use of the phrase "concern trolling." In the context of that post, it is not actionable.

If there is nothing further to report, you guys can take the debate back to NSG.

USS Monitor wrote:Lumi, you reported the use of the phrase "concern trolling." In the context of that post, it is not actionable.

If there is nothing further to report, you guys can take the debate back to NSG.

Right. Uhhh I probably need to sleep soon. Thanks for the report.

Tungustan wrote:

(Image)

Have a nice day.

Bog standard trollposting from the same thread.