A Modest Proposal

Sepulchritude Forum: The Absinthe Forum Thru December 2001: A Modest Proposal
By Bjacques on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 01:48 pm: Edit

I'm skeptical as to how many times the guy's going to go through the trouble of faking a benign personality just to cap it with I WIN, especially if the rest of us roll our our eyes and get on with it.

Still, if enough people want to go to a vetting system for new members, I can live with that. The credit card thing's too much hassle for Kallisti (and a little for us) if it works and potentially catastrophic if it doesn't.

So where's this promised thread about eating babies?

By Admin on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 01:01 pm: Edit

I know you didn't Don, I've already discussed my measures with you and I think we are in agreement.

Will discuss more later, stay tuned.

By Don_Walsh on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 12:50 pm: Edit

Lord H, I didn't propose anything involving credit cards or phones numbers or names. I proposed NOTHING affecting old members, you are grandfathered. If you WERE a new members, and have your exceptions to your privacy with three forumites, all it would take would be for ONE to say Aye, I know Lord H, let him in! on my honor.

This forum is NOT just starting up, it HAS reached critical mass,, and all we are trying to accomplish is the ejection of a single, well identified, documented and professional testbook case of a TROLL. Not a curmudgeon (ese I would be gone). A real troll. Someone who disrupts LOTS of forums and newsgroups and so on, for fun. NOT one of us. An alien, as surely as the metamorph that Sigourney Weaver faced.

By Chevalier on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 11:14 am: Edit

A repost from another thread, but it belongs here as well:

Here's why I support Don's proposal, and think that "ignoring troll posts" is not so simple.

The Staticburst posts were shrapnel bombs, obvious from the beginning. The "Kristy" posts were tests: more subtle, if equally puerile. You can, on principle, ignore a troll post; but only if you feel that this is what it is.

I would easily detect, reject and ignore any posts that read like Staticburst's. I would not automatically ignore or attack a "Kristy"-esque first post, because I wouldn't be reasonably sure that it was the ill-intentioned work of a troll, and because I believe in giving apparent newbies the benefit of the doubt.

A subtle troll is detected by the damage he has already wrought. It's far better to lock him out in the first place.

By Lordhobgoblin on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 11:13 am: Edit

Kallisti,

I agree with you 100%.

And nice enough as all you guys seem, I'd rather not give my address or even name (I have already made three exceptions to this rule though with my name) without first seeing the whites of your eyes. Others are happy to do this and that's their choice.

As for giving out my credit card number, is that starts I'm out of here.

The problem with references from is that it locks out new members. If Kalisti did that when she started the forum it would not exist today.

Hobgoblin

By Admin on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 10:55 am: Edit

Let it be said here, that I plan on settling on none of these plans.

None of the annoyances call for drastic measures. It is a fly in the ointment, that is all.

By Verawench on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 09:22 am: Edit

You are making a mistake presenting all these ideas here. Troll(s) are free to read this thread and make note of our "plans" whether they still have an account or not. If you're going to settle on something, folks, take the discussion to private emails.

By Riku964 on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 08:25 am: Edit

Wow! An awful lot of energy is being devoted to this. I think it is safe to say that even if kristyburst never showed up here again, victory was had. After all, it seems the idea was to piss folks off and interrupt things, and that definitely seems to be the case.

From the amount of "post troll posting" here, I'd say ignoring things like this is certainly not a realistic solution (since no one seems truly able to do that). Too bad, as all these other lovely ideas really are just one more element of static's victory. Business as usual would have been the only way of "defeating" this so called troll.

Just my 2 cents.

By Don_Walsh on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 08:04 am: Edit

Geoff, I proposed the 'legit' email/ISP thing, plus an alternative (for the shy) of being known by and vetted by at least ONE present forumite, which I don't regard as very exclusive. We are spread all over the globe -- you and I are in Asia, we have people in Australia, Europe, S.America, S.Africa, UK, Canada, and all over USA. Not to mention Scandinavia. Forum people from Australia and Europe have visited me in Bkk. In Europe and USA, it's far easier. In NOLA and sf you can't toss a dinner roll in a restaurant without hitting a fellow forumite. Well, in the finer restaurants anyway.

I would oppose requiring credit cards, phone numbers, etc on grounds of privacy and anonymity.

By Geoffk on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 06:52 am: Edit

Well, this just shows how on edge people are, and how trolling mucks things up for everyone. The credit card suggestion may have been over the top, but I would, at least:

1. Terminate "Kristy's" account
2. Be cautious about giving out new accounts for a few weeks or months. Preferably require SOMETHING that can be verified.
3. Stop talking about it and get back to absinthe. It's a more interesting subject and dwelling on it just encourages Staticburst/Kristy (and, god forbid, other psycho pinheads).

-- Geoff K.

By Oxygenee on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 06:06 am: Edit

Simonsuisse is a real person, not a troll. I contacted him directly after his last posts on the Pernod Fils bottle, and received a prompt and courteous reply.

By Etienne on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 05:30 am: Edit

Just a note concerning the possibility of Sumonsuisse being another persona of Staticburst. I have bid against Simonsuisse on eBay and his account is still active. There is a Picon Sucre spoon that is ending today that he has recently bid on. Don't know if this has any meaning or interest to anyone. I would hate to see someone accused mistakenly.

By Royale on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 04:46 am: Edit

Have any of you actually been to a punk rock bar OR a strip bar for that matter? There is almost always some asshole who slam dances a little too hard or drinks a little too much and grabs at the girls. If the "moshers" hit the floor I stand back and watch the band. 9 out of 10 times another drunk asshole pummels that guy or he gets tired of moshing alone and leaves. Post around the "troll". Ignore it and let's get on with life. Last night, previous to my posts, I met a real life "troll" in a bar. I looked at him wrong (I thought he was an old acquaintance) and he tried to start a fight. I ignored him and his embarrassed girl friend dragged him away before the two semi-pro boxers I was with realized he was serious about starting something and would have crushed him happily (which would have flattered, but embarrassed me.) Kallisti has a solution for some and the rest, let's just forget the "troll". Let's stop talking about it. It will go away if we don't continue to entertain it.

By Etienne on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 04:20 am: Edit

What's up with the email references? I never open anything unless I know where it comes from. Maybe I missed something?

By Heiko on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 03:29 am: Edit

I've been away over the weekend, but if we'd have to give credit card numbers in the future, I'd be away forever. I had a Visa once, but in Europe it's rather useless (most stores don't accept it, only Eurocheque cards) and on the web, after I had paid some software with it, my number was stolen and abused. That's it - no more credit card for me...

On the other hand - I'm using my real name and I have a static IP.

By Geoffk on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 02:39 am: Edit

This page is quite good as well:

http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll.htm

The one thing that eeryone seems too agree on is that either excluding or ignoring trolls is the best strategy. Fortunately, we do have a screening procedure or accounts (albeit one that apparently needs more work), so excluding them should be possible.

-- Geoff K.

By Geoffk on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 02:15 am: Edit

Yes, that's right. And it is a little extreme, but this is a serious problem, so if that what it taks, it might be necessary.

By the way, this page is an excellent discussion of trolls and how to deal with them. I encourage everyone to read it:

http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

-- Geoff K.

By _Blackjack on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 12:52 am: Edit

I don't think the point of the credit card would be to charge the person if they abused the board, but so that she would have confirmed identity and address information.

Another solution might be to require a snail-mail address confirmation, e.g., their password would be sent via snail-mail, thus confirming thier address before they can post.

Of course, all of this borders on extreme. Most other boards don't need these things. One of the other forums I read does, however, require real names.

By Geoffk on Monday, September 10, 2001 - 12:25 am: Edit

Well, you've just proved my point in a way. WHY don't you want your credit card info or ISP to be documented--because they're important to you.

Most web sites that care about the actual identity of their users demand credit cards. No card, no service. They don't have a choice.

I'm not sure what the jackboots would do with your credit card number that they couldn' do with your posting history, email address etc. Either people here are totally anonymous or they're not. Obviously total aonymity has become impractical, so we need to be able to verify identity.

Chargebacks etc. might be a hassle for Kallisti, but at least she'd have an option. Besides, how often would she have to do this?

-- Geoff K.

By Mr_Rabbit on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 11:30 pm: Edit

That would pay for the SSL...

But... while things seem niiice and calm on the legal front, I really do *not* want my credit card or ISP info on file if the jackboots ever do kick the door in. If I sound paranoid, I will point out how crazy Mcarthyism seemed before and after it happened.

Also- that would filter out more trolls, but trolls can get credit cards too. And yes, Kallisti could charge them an abuse cleanup fee of some kind, but a troll would just do a chargeback and take their money right back. Then Kallisti would have to wrangle with the credit card company.

Then suddenly her cool forum has become a harrassing fulltime job.

The more security procedures are instituted, the fewer trolls we will get. But I submit to you that Staticburst was the only really bad troll (that I remember) we've had since Kallisti added registration. And every time we add a layer, we have a slightly more restrictive environment.

Staticburst is a dedicated little fucker. I bet he would go that extra mile.

By Geoffk on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 11:14 pm: Edit

There is an easy way to eliminate trolls and make sure that people are for real, while still admitting everybody. Just insist that everyone who signs up provide one or more of the following:

1. A valid credit card number. This is the best option, since people don't give these out lightly. To verify it, the board could make a small charge (say $1.00). Anyone old enough to be drinking absinthe probably has a card, so it's an option.

and/or

2. A daytime phone number, which could be checked. This is less desirable, since a troll can lie on the phone. Still it makes it more difficult or him. Of course, that could result in some nasty calling charges for Kallisti.

and/or

3. Valid ISP information (email, user account) This is mostly for purposes of complaining if the account is abused.

In addition, people could be asked to agree to a service contract as part of signing up. The service contract would provide for expulsion from the board and other penalties. If redit cards are solicited, these could include financial penalties (i.e. fines).

I agree that trolls are not to be taken lightly. This creep obiously has some kind of vendetta going here and is the internet equivalent of a stalker. Better security is going to be necessary until he gets a life, psychiatric care etc.

Personally vouching for people as Don suggested is fine, but a lot of legitimate potential users (such as myself) would certainly be excluded that way.

I would supply a credit card to get an account here (if I had too). Would anybody else?

-- Geoff K.

By Mr_Rabbit on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 11:10 pm: Edit

Send some my way...

By Admin on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 11:00 pm: Edit

check now ...

By Marc on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 10:40 pm: Edit

what is it? I want some.

By Verawench on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 10:35 pm: Edit

Ahhh there it is, hiding in my bulk mail folder. Great job Head!

By Emmy on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 09:37 pm: Edit

heh. good work, Head! very enlightening ;) lol...

By Verawench on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 09:28 pm: Edit

Just did. And?

By Head_Prosthesis on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 09:23 pm: Edit

Do you people ever check your email?

By Emmy on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 09:18 pm: Edit

it's public in so far as there's no way to know who you are dealing with on the internet. anyone can have an email address and write up a fake bio to submit for approval... and anyone can roleplay their persona any way they want. very few of us are real to eachother outside of this forum. until i meet you in vegas, you're just a bunch of pixels with a personality, nothing physical and tangible to attatch that to.

By Verawench on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 09:13 pm: Edit

It's not purely a public forum. Its members are lightly screened before they are able to join.

By Emmy on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 09:11 pm: Edit

this being a public forum should not have such rules instituted. trolls are a given and can only be dealt with when they rear their ugly heads. if you want to get elitist (or vanguardist rather), the best thing to do is to set up a separate message board to which you can only gain access through veteranship on the public board or via nominations... but this sort of country club mentality won't fly with many folks, and i doubt it would even go over too well with kallisti. one could say "well, fuck em. we don't need em" but at the same time some say that about those who decline to participate in a forum of mixed company trolls and all. me? i could care less either way, but am more inclined to live (and properly deal) with the ugly masses than sequester myself away from them or put up barbed wire on the fences.

By Chrysippvs on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 09:11 pm: Edit

Don,

I open this post on the hopes that it is about eating children and still with this static fellow...oy

By Don_Walsh on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 08:44 pm: Edit

I did just that, second time round. Then within a week we find that the same asshole 'is' the socalled Kristy and the socalled simonsuisse, and we already knew it was same troll as bothered the forum last year.

Not everyone will ignore the troll. Not everyone WANTS to ignore the troll. So, effectively ejecting the troll is the price of peace and quiet. If anyone has a *better* idea as to how to go about doing that, I'd like to hear it. Otherwise, my proposal stands and I intend to lobby for it.

I post under my own name. I'm not the only one. It is far from unanimously agreed that anonymity is required. For those newbies who require anonymity, and who want to post, seeking out one just one registered forumite to sponsor them, and take responsibility for them, is not too arduous a task. Lurkers can still lurk. But the underside of the bridge will be fenced off. No trolls allowed.

By Guillermo on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 08:06 pm: Edit

I agree wholeheartedly with Vera -- it takes two to tango.

By Verawench on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 08:01 pm: Edit

Trolls are obnoxious and should be delt with.. and I do agree with Don's ideas. But you know, changing these rules will not be enough. Present forumites ought to adjust their approach towards the "bad apples" by trying their best to ignore them.

By Blygdon on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 07:55 pm: Edit

You close your community down to an exclusive set by following either route. Would you rather an open forum typically informing and interesting opinions far outweigh the bad apples, or would you prefer a select few in your play set?

As a lurker, it's (each of you and your comments) all very fascinating.

1. A traceable email address and IP (not AOL or any similar ISP in sole opinion of Kallisti as Admin)

OR

2. Be personally know to and vetted by a present forumite (other than Kristy/Staticburst/Simonsuisse etc.)

By Chevalier on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 07:47 pm: Edit

I second it.

By Don_Walsh on Sunday, September 09, 2001 - 07:45 pm: Edit

Since it is obvious that the same troll who caused Kallisti to institute the present system of registration and password, has figured out how to frustrate that system, and is setting up multiple personas and causing some havoc here, I propose that Kallisti require, for all NEW forumites, one of the followingL

1. A traceable email address and IP (not AOL or any similar ISP in sole opinion of Kallisti as Admin)

OR

2. Be personally know to and vetted by a present forumite (other than Kristy/Staticburst/Simonsuisse etc.)

This would provide for anonymity on the one hand for those who think it is imperative, and security for the forum on the other.

Make no mistake about it, this troll is out to destroy this forum and has been about that for more than a year.

Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only
Administer Page |Delete Conversation |Close Conversation |Move Conversation