Ask HN on: Controlling trolling | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN on: Controlling trolling

12 pointsaswanson19 comments

What do you think the best response to it is: 1) Ignore 2) Mock 3) Reason with

I'm leaning towards ignore.

4) Delete, but still display to the troll

Seems clever, but I don't think it would actually make a difference. Especially since it'd be dead simple to detect when you'd been deleted.

This encourages continued bad behavior, because as far as they know, their comments are still there for the world to see. They should see they've been deleted, but get no reason as to why.

Trolls and other misfits are trying to get attention, however negative. Denying it to them is the best way to get rid of them.

It's fine if they keep posting: after a few posts of theirs are soft-deleted like this, the moderation system should soft-delete their posts as they're posted. Let them waste their time shouting into the void.

Right on your first sentence. Denying them attention is the best way to get rid of them. That's why you delete their posts. If you make them think you didn't, they'll continue because they think their posts are still being read by others.

Eventually by actually deleting them, they realize how long it takes them to write the posts and how short a time it takes you to get rid of them and give up.

In my experience (and I should mention, I have a LOT of it) delete and ignore. They'll give up eventually. At some point they have to realize each attempt at trolling takes minutes of their time to write and only a click or two for you to delete.

There's a "Troll Whispering" session at Web 2.0 Expo SF this year and also some good info in the blog post we put up about it: http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2008/03/troll-whispering-a...

ignore.

Mock and you feed the troll, reason with and you fall into his trap.

too late: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=162680

Yeah, I bit too. That actually inspired this submittal.

Yes, it is a blatant troll, but it's also an interesting question. As long as a troll brings interesting discussion and not flame wars, it's not necessarily a bad thing.

Asking why someone is special is not a thoughtful question. This is a rare case where a troll has managed to spawn coherent anecdotes. If you read over the comments, there is no real discussion, there isn't even a topic. It's just a bunch of biographies from people professing pg to be their personal jesus. It reads like an infomercial.

Ignore the trolls. Start a proper discussion because topics like this get killed, like this one just did.

Meh. Good points. I and probably a lot of other people are probably feeling pretty stupid right now for falling for this. I think I have a certain combination of gullibility and skepticism that makes me a perfect target for these things. I'm a skeptic in that I am quick to consider that someone could be just wrong, but I'm gullible in that I'm slow to consider the possibility that someone is lying.

pg hath spoken: "This is such a classic troll. Not even a subtle new variant, but practically a 1980s Usenet troll. I was going to ask if people minded if I killed it, but a forum just can't let itself be pwned by trolls this blatant. So..."

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=162876

sometimes telling the difference between a troll (usually bad) and a devil's advocate (sometimes good, sometimes annoying) can be difficult

Damn. I go sleep for a few hours, and look what happens...

yeah you're right. Didn't notice it until too late...

Usually just ignore. In some situations, however, I think it makes sense to make one response, and then ignore. These are situations where the troll brings up some idea you would otherwise like to comment on (and presumably others might want to read your comment).

Disemvowel.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com