[Appeal] Trolling/Baiting With no Intended Target?

[Birina]

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=519605

My thread (which I must stress that only I post in) has just been locked. Given that this is something I do to entertain myself and others, I am nonplussed. The reason given for the lock and warning was an almost implausibly general "troll/bait/spam". Certainly runs the gamut, huh? I don't think this is fair. My history of being warned (once, three years ago!) for satirizing men writing women was brought up as part of the reason. I would note two things:

1: While I stand by the fact that what the mod referenced was feminist in nature (I was making fun of people who actually write that way about women and explained as much) I have since toned that down and never replicated it out of respect for the fact that some people might still be offended by it.

2: It has nothing to do with the thread that was locked.

The Mod opens by contending that my introduction was baity/trolly. Who was I baiting? Who was I trolling? Myself? The thread is just me. Nobody else posts in it, nobody else certainly has to read it. I shall post the introduction, which, frankly, I think is quite obviously self deprecating and humorous here:

---

OOC: Folks, I'll be up front with you. This is satire. In case you're not very educated, that means that all the parts you like and think are good were interpreted correctly and all the parts you don't and think were shitty were intentionally that way and you just don't get it.

THE PIECE is very high-minded. The piece is very cerebral. The piece is allegorical. The piece is noteworthy. The piece is eclectic. The piece, this piece, would be well received at Cannes or Sundance. Essentially, what I'm saying is that it's not very good.

---

It is an introduction that opens by saying it is satire and ends by saying that it isn't very good. How this can be seen as baiting and not an attempt at humor, I don't know. The Mod proceeded to critique the substance of the style by saying that good satire doesn't inform you it is satire. And yet, in a fit of irony, he took it seriously enough to lock it.

I'm going to quote what trolling is under the OSRS:

"Trolling/Baiting/Gloating: Trolling is defined as posts that are made with the aim of angering people. (like 'ALL JEWS ARE [insert vile comment here]' for example). Someone disagreeing with you does not equate to trolling. Intent is incredibly important and will be judged by the moderators to the best of their abilities. Honest belief does not excuse trolling. Disagreements are expected and conducting yourself in a civil manner is ideal. Trollbaiting is the action of making posts that attract trolls. A prime example of trollbaiting would be gloating over the results of an election."

My gosh. If I wanted to anger people, I wouldn't be posting attempts at humor in Roleplaying. I'd be in General. And the idea of baiting... I mean, who or what am I baiting? It's a closed thread! Nobody else can respond!

The final accusation lumped into the very broad "troll/bait/spam" accusation is, of course, spam. This one is ridiculous on its face. Spam is low effort. I put work and effort into my posts. He doesn't appreciate the results of them? Fine. But that doesn't make something spam.

My nation is run by a Windmill Committee that suppresses knowledge of windmills. My flag is cropped off center. I am very clearly a humorous nation. I write what I write to make people laugh and bring them pleasure. I have been incredibly fortunate enough to have some people reach out to me (one today, about the post that was locked funnily enough) to tell me they enjoy it. I cropped out his name. You'll note the conversation in TG took place before the thread was locked:

https://imgur.com/35PWqKB

That is why I do what I do. To entertain people and make them happy. Not to anger them. Not to bait nonexistent boogeymen. And certainly not to spam the forums.

[Athretvari]

I wish to post in support of Birina’s appeal. I happened upon the thread in question after the OP’s 2nd post. I read through it (which is very entertaining, BTW) understanding that it was a Sci Fi Noir detective story, because the author took the time to claim as much in the thread title and at the very beginning of the 1st post.

It is a bit difficult for role-players to include nefarious characters in their writings if the actions, speech, thoughts, and beliefs of those characters are assigned to the writer and not the character in the story.

[Geisterwald]

I don’t usually post about this sort of thing but I think it’s crazy that birina got blocked for this. The author is putting out some of the most consistently hilarious stories i’ve seen on this site. They’re clearly absurdist satire. The country of Birina is led by pompous, sexist, foolish buffoons. They aren’t aspirational characters, they’re the butt of the joke. The author is brilliantly lampooning corrupt bureaucrats and sleazy politicians. Transporting them to the world of film noir just adds to the humor. The introduction is a meta, fourth wall breaking kind of joke. It’s blatantly obvious that the story is satire. Beginning the story with a mock disclaimer about the fact that it’s satire and self-aggrandizing about his own brilliance and the assumed dullness of the reader is exactly what one of his characters would say. I found it laugh out funny. I don’t think there are bounds to what constitutes good satire, as the mod suggests, and if there are, birina stories clearly fall within those bounds because they’re whip-clever and uproariously amusing.

Please unblock this thread so readers like me can see where the story goes next. People who don’t get the joke are free to read other material.

[Lamoni]

Unless you are Birina or a moderator, do not post in this thread.

[Lamoni]

Folks, I'll be up front with you. This is satire. In case you're not very educated, that means that all the parts you like and think are good were interpreted correctly and all the parts you don't and think were shitty were intentionally that way and you just don't get it.

This bit here is trolling, since it assumes that members of the NS userbase that do not get your brand of satire are "not very educated." I don't quite see it as flamebait, however.

THE PIECE is very high-minded. The piece is very cerebral. The piece is allegorical. The piece is noteworthy. The piece is eclectic. The piece, this piece, would be well received at Cannes or Sundance. Essentially, what I'm saying is that it's not very good.

Having this bit right after that does not help your case, since it can be read as gloating.

My ruling is that the warning for trolling stands, while the baiting and spam can be dropped. The thread will remain locked.

[Birina]

To be clear: You are saying that the statement "Satire means the parts you like and think are good were interpreted correctly and the parts you don't and think were shitty were intentionally that way and you just don't get it." is serious and not intended to be humorous?

I find that... frankly quite difficult to believe.

And if you read what you yourself quoted it ends with "Essentially, what I'm saying is that it's not very good."

How is stating, verbatim, that the writing itself is not very good gloating? I am getting the indication that I am being moderated on writing that has not necessarily been read entirely. Which is a disservice.

Furthermore, if the intro is the only part that is objectionable, what if I just delete the intro as a compromise and not throw the baby out with the bathwater? Why does the entire thread need to be locked?

[Lamoni]

Your Appeal has been considered by a Moderator uninvolved in the original decision, and denied.

Your only recourse is a Final Appeal, which should only be requested when you believe a significant injustice has occurred. Please read through the Appeals Process prior to submitting any Final Appeal, and note that requests for a Final Appeal that are judged to be frivolous, such as for minor warnings and bans, may result in further warnings being added to your nation.

Thread locked.