[Zer0 (OP)]

Moderators on TNS are quite Lenient & supposedly Kind on Trolls.
👎

Please Change your Policies regarding posting Conspiracy Theories & Please Stop encouraging Trollish Behaviour.
🙏


P.S. - A genuine heartfelt humble request to all members,
 PLEASE Do Not Feed the TROLLZ!
🙏
(itz not a jolly gud idea atall)

[Kryptid]

How do you define a troll?

[Zer0 (OP)]

@Kryptid
Hi there!
🙋

TROLL :-

" Someone who leaves an intentionally annoying or offensive message on the internet, in order to upset someone or to get attention or cause trouble. "
 
" A message that someone leaves on the internet that is intended to annoy people. "

" To leave an insulting or offensive message on the internet in order to upset someone, or to get attention or cause trouble. "

" To intentionally do or say something annoying or offensive in order to upset someone, or to get attention or leave an insulting or offensive message on the internet in order to upset someone, or to get attention or cause trouble. "

But the ones Attacking & Infesting this Science Forum are a bit smart & tactful...Please allow Me to Elaborate with a few examples :-

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=65239.0
(Preaching Trolls which forcefully Shove their Supreme GOD into a Science Forum & then Copy&Paste almost half the verses of their " Holy Book " on the webpage, as if TNS has unlimited free cloud data storage capacity)
What's worse, is they work in teams of Two(2) n keep posting counter arguments so that the OP never dries out but ends up becoming the looooongest unproductive OP!
👎
Perhaps they feel if they can Convert even one Scientifically enabled mind into a religious believer, then the Troll shall receive a direct confirmed ticket to Heaven directly by GOD!
😏👎

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81847.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81854.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81852.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81846.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81855.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81851.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81857.0
(Flood Trolls who all of a Sudden unleash a " Shock & Awe " campaign onto a Specific subsection of the site & go on n onn n ooonnn asking questions without pausing or even slightly considering the possibility of Others who might also have a few questions to ask)
Then when their queries are answered satisfactorily, there are no further enquiries & it's almost as if the Folks who tried to contribute inorder to genuinely answer the OP were just mere Fools!
👎

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81864.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=70418.0
(Regular & very predictable Seller & AD posting Trolls. They first ask a humble question, & then quickly jump onto Advertising their world renown supreme product)
Such OPs just add on dead weight to the Forum. They should be taken Down!
👎

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=80356.msg611413#msg611413

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=80390.msg611838#msg611838

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81812.0
(New wannabe UTUBE Superstars Trolls who Twist & Break up facts & post em as New Discoveries, Do not ever bother to Respond to any clarifications & keep posting their channel links all over the webpage inorder to increase their Tube Followers count)
Feeding off like leeches, they eat up space n take undue advantage of such a free for all wonderful forum.
😏👎

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81740.msg632384#msg632384
(Conspiracy Theory Trolls who post Absolute Crap without even a miniscule amount if Evidence & completely baseless allegations & even Dare to go upto the extent to Blame & Accuse other Users of being paid or have taken money from rich businessmen inorder to counter attack their hallucinatingly delusional OPs)

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81587.0
The hog on & feed on the time of the Wise & Scholarly on the Forum & hence the " Question of the Week " finds itself dry without any takers as such time killing Trolls are evading the Real questions & wish to cocoon all members into their revengeful irrelevant & baseless Conspiracy Theories!
👎

P.S. - Feeding the Trolls will Attract more on more if em!
WE all Users should Help the Moderators by Refraining from doing so, Please Remember...United WE Stand...Divided... it's anyone's guess...WE All Suffer Collectively.
🙏

[Bored chemist]

How do you define a troll?

Doing this on a science site?

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81928.msg632638#msg632638

[Jolly2]

@Kryptid
Hi there!
🙋

TROLL :-

" Someone who leaves an intentionally annoying or offensive message on the internet, in order to upset someone or to get attention or cause trouble. "
 
" A message that someone leaves on the internet that is intended to annoy people. "

" To leave an insulting or offensive message on the internet in order to upset someone, or to get attention or cause trouble. "

" To intentionally do or say something annoying or offensive in order to upset someone, or to get attention or leave an insulting or offensive message on the internet in order to upset someone, or to get attention or cause trouble. "

That's not the definition of trolling rather it's a small list of a few tactics a troll might use. While there are the newer types of Troll that seek to provocate for It's own sake.
Trolling is almost always the action of a person or group designed to prevent or stop discussion from continuing. A Troll exists to shut down discussion.

But the ones Attacking & Infesting this Science Forum are a bit smart & tactful...Please allow Me to Elaborate with a few examples :-

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=65239.0
(Preaching Trolls which forcefully Shove their Supreme GOD into a Science Forum & then Copy&Paste almost half the verses of their " Holy Book " on the webpage, as if TNS has unlimited free cloud data storage capacity)
What's worse, is they work in teams of Two(2) n keep posting counter arguments so that the OP never dries out but ends up becoming the looooongest unproductive OP!
👎
Perhaps they feel if they can Convert even one Scientifically enabled mind into a religious believer, then the Troll shall receive a direct confirmed ticket to Heaven directly by GOD!
😏👎

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81847.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81854.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81852.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81846.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81855.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81851.0

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=81857.0

Many of the topics you list are perfectly acceptable, how is a rainbow generated? Questions regarding the moon.

It appears to me that you're the one, trolling here, you're the one seeking to prevent topics being raised or discussed. If you cant win the argument, closing the topic is a troll tactic.

We need more not less discussion.

[Bored chemist]

A Troll exists to shut down discussion.

No.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Psychological_characteristics

[evan_au]

We need more not less discussion.

This sounds like the attitude of a:

Conspiracy Theory Troll who posts Absolute Crap without even a miniscule amount of Evidence

[Jolly2]

A Troll exists to shut down discussion.

No.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll#Psychological_characteristics

Yes

This is typically for the troll's amusement, or to achieve a specific result such as disrupting a rival's online activities

[Jolly2]

We need more not less discussion.

This sounds like the attitude of a:

Conspiracy Theory Troll who posts Absolute Crap without even a miniscule amount of Evidence

Quite the opposite, discussion allows conspiracies to be proven or disproven. If a suggestion is complete nonsense a discussion can show that.

Trolls generally don't start discussions they generally seek to destroy them

[evan_au]

Quite the opposite, discussion allows conspiracies to be proven or disproven. If a suggestion is complete nonsense a discussion can show that.

Your conspiracy theories have been overwhelmingly disproven on this discussion board.
Why hasn't it stopped you?

Maybe because you immediately dump another, giant, steaming, pile of

Crap without even a miniscule amount of Evidence

[Bored chemist]

This is typically for the troll's amusement, or to achieve a specific result such as disrupting a rival's online activities

And, since nobody here is anyone's rival, we are left with the trolls who are just playing themselves.

Quite the opposite, discussion allows conspiracies to be proven or disproven.

True, but trolls keep posting the same nonsense long after it has been disproved. So you get long topics where one side is just repeating unevinced nonsense, rather than actually being able to point to science.

[Kryptid]

We need more not less discussion.

This sounds like the attitude of a:

Conspiracy Theory Troll who posts Absolute Crap without even a miniscule amount of Evidence

Quite the opposite, discussion allows conspiracies to be proven or disproven. If a suggestion is complete nonsense a discussion can show that.

Trolls generally don't start discussions they generally seek to destroy them

Conspiracy theories, by their very nature, cannot be disproved. It's always possible for the theorist to invoke excuses (including new conspiracies) to explain away either a lack evidence for their theory (such as, "I can't show the evidence beause it's being suppressed") or the presence of evidence against it (such as, "you can't trust that source because it's disinformation to promote their agenda").

[Jolly2]

We need more not less discussion.

This sounds like the attitude of a:

Conspiracy Theory Troll who posts Absolute Crap without even a miniscule amount of Evidence

Quite the opposite, discussion allows conspiracies to be proven or disproven. If a suggestion is complete nonsense a discussion can show that.

Trolls generally don't start discussions they generally seek to destroy them

Conspiracy theories, by their very nature, cannot be disproved.

Disagree it depends on the actual conspiracy being suggested. Leaks or the release of internal documents have often proven past conspiracy theories true, as they have also shown them false.

It's always possible for the theorist to invoke excuses (including new conspiracies) to explain away either a lack evidence for their theory (such as, "I can't show the evidence beause it's being suppressed")

Supressed evidence is evidence, that is not the same as no evidence at all. If there is a report that proves something and a government is suppressing the information or stopping the report being made public and there are many examples of that happening in history,  then there is evidence it's just being withheld.

or the presence of evidence against it (such as, "you can't trust that source because it's disinformation to promote their agenda").

Funny both sides use that one.

[Bored chemist]

Disagree it depends on the actual conspiracy being suggested. Leaks or the release of internal documents have often proven past conspiracy theories true, as they have also shown them false.

But the leaked documents are faked.

That's the thing.
You really can't disprove a conspiracy theory.
So , as is often the case, you are disagreeing with reality.

On a related note, how does a forum deal with a troll who doesn't realise they are a troll?

[Kryptid]

as they have also shown them false.

The conspiracy theorist can always claim that such documents are disinformation in order to keep their theory from being falsified.

Supressed evidence is evidence, that is not the same as no evidence at all.

The problem is that what a lot of conspiracy theorists consider to be "suppressed evidence" cannot be distinguished from hearsay or rumors because it cannot be confirmed to be true.

[charles1948]

As Jolly has rightly pointed out, "suppressed" evidence is not devoid of value. It can reveal truth by implication.

This sometimes happened during World War 2.  During that conflict, Britain attempted to infiltrate secret agents into Germany, to find out what the Germans were planning.  For example, to report whether the Germans were planning to invade a certain country, or not.

Now, if a British agent got detected and captured, the Germans would try to turn this to their advantage.  By making the captured agent send misleading reports back to Britain.  Such as: "No, the Germans aren't going to invade".

When in fact, the Germans actually were planning to invade.  But were trying to suppress the fact.
This might have misled the British authorities - if they didn't know that the agent had been captured and was being forced to send misleading information.

But if the British did know - because the agent had included a subtle clue in his message that he'd been captured - then the British could obtain the truth - by simply reversing the information supplied in the message.

[Bored chemist]

As Jolly has rightly pointed out, "suppressed" evidence is not devoid of value.

Do you know what suppression of evidence means?

"Suppression of evidence is a term used in the United States legal system to describe the lawful or unlawful act of preventing evidence from being shown ..."
from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suppression_of_evidence

So evidence that is suppressed is not heard.

You and Jolly may thing that evidence which nobody knows about can be valuable, but in reality, it can't because people don't know about it.

The only thing that comes close is where you see a suspicious lack of information about something.

You seem to have it muddled with ideas like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vi_coactus
and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duress_code

which are essentially unrelated.

[charles1948]

Aren't you missing the point?  If certain facts are deliberately suppressed - or, at least, not allowed even to be mentioned, isn't the inference as plain as a pikestaff.

We all know that.  But let's just drop the matter.  I don't so much mind being blown up in a spectacular global thermonuclear war. At least that'd contain elements of excitement.

But not being arrested, led down to a dingy execution cell, and shot in the back of the neck by some Party snowflake.

[Bored chemist]

Aren't you missing the point?  If certain facts are deliberately suppressed - or, at least, not allowed even to be mentioned, isn't the inference as plain as a pikestaff.

Here's a hint.

The only thing that comes close is where you see a suspicious lack of information about something.

[charles1948]

Aren't you missing the point?  If certain facts are deliberately suppressed - or, at least, not allowed even to be mentioned, isn't the inference as plain as a pikestaff.

Here's a hint.

The only thing that comes close is where you see a suspicious lack of information about something.

I see what you mean.  You put it more succinctly, and more guardedly.  So you're probably safe from getting shot.