[Reader-list] what is to be done?

[S.Fatima]

Dear Vivek
Sorry to sound like this, but some of such mails from
you reek of elitism. Redirecting some mails to the
bullshit folder is one thing, but insulting them
further goes to another level. Isn't that a personal
vendetta that some on this list are requesting not to
get into.
Your calmness is akin to sitting in a limousine which
is driving through the filthy roads and slums, which
your darkened windows don't allow you to see.

sf

--- Vivek Narayanan <vivek at sarai.net> wrote:

> Strange... I have no idea about the recent
> "incident" that you all are 
> talking about...  I feel completely calm and happy
> with what has been 
> happening on the reader list.
> 
> Oh, wait a minute, that must be because I have 58
> unread messages (since 
> january 21) that went directly into my "bullshit"
> folder!  Time to go 
> and delete them, I suppose.
> 
> Vivek
> 
> Tapas Ray wrote:
> > I agree with Aarti and Nishant. I have been using
> filters quite 
> > effectively against these individuals, whose
> crudity entertained me 
> > initially in a perverse sort of way, but became
> tiresome after a while. 
> > There is no need for anyone to engage with them,
> since it is now clear 
> > that their objective is not to take part in
> rational debate but to 
> > destroy this space by swamping it with hate
> speech. (The reason, I 
> > think, is that they know they lack the ability to
> engage in reasoned 
> > debate, and cannot hope to "win" it.)
> >
> > Mail filters are effective and can be put in place
> by anyone in a few 
> > minutes. Nishant's suggestion about tagging and
> reporting abuse is also 
> > good, but having such a system would mean someone,
> acting as moderator, 
> > having to spend part of his/her day because of the
> actions of these 
> > individuals - and I do not think they deserve so
> much importance.
> >
> > Tapas
> >
> >
> >
> > Nishant Shah wrote:
> >   
> >> Hi Arti, All,
> >> I have been a silent lurker in these days of
> virulent invective and
> >> hate-speech that have unfolded on the
> reader-list. I haven't been silent
> >> because I had nothing to say, or that I was not
> provoked. I haven't been
> >> silent because I did not feel equally angered,
> sometimes to such an extent
> >> that I had to walk away from the computer and
> swear for the nth time that I
> >> will just unsubscribe from the reader's list. I
> have been silent because I
> >> do not think I have the vocabulary to counter
> arguments that are based on
> >> nothing more than personal prejudices, or the
> resources to deal with emails
> >> that read a little more than poison pen.
> >>
> >> However, there is also another reason why I
> prefer to be silent, as missiles
> >> are hurled from one end to the other, one camp
> offering peace flags and
> >> reasons, the other camp packaging the same in
> mails that resemble hand made
> >> grenades used in violent spaces. Out of long
> habit of dwelling on various
> >> digital forms, I have realised that the behaviour
> (read as writing) of some
> >> of the members who have come to haunt this
> particular digital platform, can
> >> only be classified as 'Troll'.
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll).
> >> And as the classic motto goes, 'Do Not Feed The
> Troll.' There have been many
> >> discussions on the reader-list about questions of
> censorship, moderation,
> >> facilitation and so on. Each time a particularly
> venomous bunch of people
> >> descend upon the reader-list, probably abusing
> their office time and
> >> professional resources to spew horror on to the
> unwary people, we talk about
> >> the possibilities of lags, of delays, of
> moderation and of down-right
> >> banning. However, all these, as we have have
> often observed, will lead to
> >> nowhere. Death, assassination and banning on the
> interwebz is unfortunately,
> >> only notional, symbolic. There are no finalities
> to either of them and the
> >> banning or the moderation of one ID would only
> lead to the Trolls spinning
> >> of many more IDs which would then come back for
> their pound and a half of
> >> flesh.
> >>
> >> Hence, IMHO, the best thing to do is to stop
> FEEDING the TROLLS. I second
> >> your request that there are so many other more
> fruitful ways of engaging
> >> with so many different topics, that it is almost
> criminal (in the non-legal
> >> sense of the word) to waste time and resources in
> trying to convince the
> >> digital equivalent of a black box with six
> pre-fed scripts and no semblance
> >> of intelligence - artificial or otherwise. We
> might, next, as well start
> >> arguing with characters in a novel, parts in a
> movie, components of a
> >> website. Instead, it is best to just move on.
> >>
> >> Having said that, I also realise that it is
> sometimes difficult to move on.
> >> More often than not, Trolls specialise in putting
> their finger on the exact
> >> right spot that triggers our buttons and induce
> instantaneous combustion.
> >> And hence, there will always be people replying
> to these Flames that come
> >> our way; unfortunately thinking all the time that
> they are doing
> >> fire-fighting, when actually they are just adding
> fuel to the Troll Fire.
> >> One technical measure that I can think of - and
> this takes away the
> >> unenviable job of a list moderator - is to
> implement a tagging system in
> >> place for all mails that come to the reader list.
> This at least, allows
> >> people to tag their mails - sometimes the titles
> are misleading and provide
> >> no warning for what is to come - so that when a
> mail arrives, the readers
> >> can see the tags and decide for themselves
> whether they want to read the
> >> mail or not.
> >>
> >> The second suggestion I have might be more open
> for discussion - Most user
> >> based free spaces of interaction in the
> cyberspace have developed a policy
> >> of reactive resistance to what they look upon as
> an abuse of the space or
> >> its resources. Under such a policy, you do not
> ban users from saying what
> >> they want to say, in whichever way they want to
> say it, but instead allow
> >> other users to 'Report Abuse' against a
> particular user. The Terms of what
> >> constitutes Abuse can often be generic but also
> be very specific in nature
> >> and can have a large consultation from the people
> who have any stake in it.
> >> Reporting Abuse eventually needs some sort of a
> moderator who either
> >> resolves the problem or simply marks the charged
> person as guilty of abuse.
> >> Many times, the reason for this marking is also
> made public. This ensures
> >> that some IDs which are seen as destructive or
> Trollish, can appear
> >> differently in the conversations, flagged as
> potentially abusive in nature.
> >> This also helps in new readers or readers who
> have more invested in the
> >> questions, to stay away from the responses that
> these IDs might be
> >> generating.
> >>
> >> I hope both these suggestions sound feasible. I
> would be available for
> >> further communication or planning out of the
> architectural integration of
> >> such sort to the Reader's List. I am glad for
> your intervention and pleased
> >> to see that instead of wasting time in responding
> to the Trolls, we are now
> >> looking upon them as symptomatic to a certain
> kind of problem that emerges
> >> in 'free speech and free space' and trying to
> constructively deal with them.
> >>
> >> Un-lurking after a long time,
> >> Nishant
> >> On Jan 22, 2008 12:54 PM, Aarti Sethi
> <aarti.sethi at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>   
> >>     
> >>> Dear all,
> >>>
> 
=== message truncated ===



      Bollywood, fun, friendship, sports and more. You name it, we have it on http://in.promos.yahoo.com/groups