flamers, bashers and trolls

Please could the moderators look at strategies to prevent this site being invaded by trolls/flamers.

I fear this site may be vulnerable simply because it may be difficult to distinguish someone with real issues (owing to the nature of ASD and associated conditions) from people coming on because this discussion group might provide entertainment.

Flamers tend to post something provocative, or respond to existing dialogue in a provocative way. This is sometimes referred to as "flamebait". We need guidance how best to avoid "taking the bait" - that is responding in such a way that the flamer gets his "kicks" (adrenalin rush) from escalating and escalating an argument.

Most web discussion groups have this problem, and particularly chat room where the exchanges are more spontaneous. I feel the time has come when the moderators need to provide guidance.

We are likely to get several flamers watching the turmoil each other creates, and sometimes working together. However we may also get single flamers having multiple profile names.

It is relatively easy to find a script on this website or another website addressing autism, and create a little personal story. They may have a different story for each profile name, each with the potential to cause a stir. They will look for people who react easily and are entertaining, and they may develop names/scripts to suit their targets. 

Sadly there are people who get their fun as trolls/flamers. I suspect rather than being poor socialisers or bored kids, they are most likely to get an addiction for doing it. Starting a row generates a high, and they then want more and more highs. Flamers coming on here will be going on numbers of web site discussion boards and chat rooms.

It is unfortunate but I think we now need to be prepared for this happening.

  • Hiya, 

    Finally got a chance to sit down and think of a response. Thanks for the discussion Longman and everyone's contributions so far. To be transparent I think our perspective is pretty close to what Scorpion has said but we want to outline why. 

    First thing is that we want the community to be inclusive and welcoming and also accept differences and challenges from users. After all, given the challenges a parent or a person on the spectrum may face it's important we are as patient and understanding as it's possible to be. 

    We do understand how frustrating you, as the member's of the community, may find some difficult or troubling messages though and we'll be understanding of that. Whilst we will focus on being as calm as possible, and we'd love you to be as well, we know sometimes it's very difficult. 

    There is a natural tendency to make judgements about some troubling behaviour as well and as Scorpion points out it's very easy to see posts as evidence for a wide variety of behaviour. One person may seem curt and insulting and this could be seen as deliberate or negative where it's simply a reflection of a communication style. 

    In the last decade managing communities I've personally seen a lot of unpleasant behaviour but also the amazing opportunities presented by communities, to help each other grow and learn and be positive. What I've rarely seen, outside of some very strange moments, is organised campaigns of agression or insults. So I think it's far more likely to see individuals who may be problematic than organised actions, at least outside of inappropriate advertisers. 

    So when dealing with these situations we always have to balance the needs of individuals against the needs of everyone in a community. We'd encourage people to show patience and use the feedback option, that way we can see problems and hope to head them off. 

    Of course that doesn't mean that this service will work for everyone and when that's the case we'll do everything we can to find alternatives and work with people to address problems that make using this public, group service difficult. One thing it's worth noting is that non of those decisions happen without communication with people involved in disputes, just that this often happens away from the forum. 

    So that's our approach but you did ask for advice Longman, about how individuals should react. I'd say give people the benefit of the doubt whilst also being honest and letting us know about problems. Try to avoid an assumption of a wider problem unless this becomes clear. 

    And finally, in all my experience, it's the tone of a community that defines how most people interact with it. Like any place in the 'offline' world there's often a sense or understanding of what behaviour is expected or encouraged (though I recognise there may be unique challenges for people in sensing that). By posting in a way that's positive and helpful other people are encouraged to do the same and people with other intentions may be more likely to follow this direction, or at least are easier to reveal. 

    So that's where I'd encourage people's energy, to continue to build a helpful, supportive service.

    Damn, what can I say, I'm an old hippy at heart :) 

  • I like reading some confrontational posts on here, I really enjoy Wolfbear for example. 

    However I agree that there seems to be some weird posts that appear to be fanatics, particulary science denialists. I personally think this forum opperates quite smooth. I also think that it needs to be considered that people on the spectrum can suffer from frustration and it's important not to punish them for retalliation. 

    Maybe consider if the poster is contributing to the comunity, or just making random abstract statements?

  • Hey peeps, 

    Just to say we will be replying to this as well, just to put our take out there - just actually been busy dealing with some problem postings across social media.

    Didn't want you to think weren't responded or interested :)

  • Yes, in most things, there is a fine line, somewhere down the middle, where it's probably best to tread.

    I think if we all use the 'Feedback to NAS' reporting facility responsibly (and yes, I am slapping myself on my own wrist for need following my advice at times) then we can probably keep on top of any problem characters.

    It's like society in general - if everyone (or at least the vast majority of law abiding citizens) took on the responsibility of policing each other, responsibly, then we would not need a Police Force.

  • Fair points, both posts, Scorpion, and thanks for being candid. The present system may be sufficient.

    Flamers though have had quite damaging impact on other sites.

    I did in the second paragraph of my post indicate the difficulty of knowing what's what. The usual advice is not to "feed the trolls" - and once people know about the risks others can intercept and gently nudge the feeder that they have been trolled.

    However I agree seeing them off sharply might work. Although what we want to avoid is word getting round the troll community that you can get a fiesty reaction off this site. As you've demonstrated in the second of your posts, things can be taken different ways.

    I fully appreciate my concern to do something about the public understanding of autism could be perceived by others as threatening. Perhaps something in between is better, but I'm not sure the opposite tactic of doing nothing is any more virtuous.

  • Just to illustrate my point a little clearer, longman (and please note that is just an example, and that I do not actually think this), how would you feel if I, or someone else, wrote, the following?

    I hereby accuse you of being here for no reason other than to cause local authorities, and other organisations, problems through manipulating the vulnerable, and easily influenced, individuals on these forums into involving the police, or threatening other legal action, where it may not be entirely necessary.

    And I challenge you to prove otherwise!

    Do you see that not only do we all have limited access to the facts, in any matter, and it's very easy to jump to unwarranted conclusions, simply because of a lack of knowledge and understanding, but also that once accused it is as good as impossible for the accussed to prove the accuser(s) wrong?

    That's not to say that everyone should be given free reign to do whatever they wish - every community needs it's norms of acceptable behaviour - but being overly quick to accuse, judge, and meet out punishment, for any and all offences is just as bad as allowing anarchy to take over - but for different reasons.

    And, just to re-iterate, the above quote is just an example - it is not what I actually think.

  • The forums have moderators, and each post has a 'Feedback to NAS' link - surely that's really all that's required? A way to report them and people who can deal with them.

    Also, I'm sure you had me in mind when you wrote some of your post, longman (i.e. the bit about avoiding 'taking the bait'), and yes, I probably should resist the urge to play with them, but I say if people like that want to come on here and start trouble then I'll quite happily see them off - and ignoring them often doesn't work, and they'll then just spam the forums more and more - taking them on and facing them down, generally does, because like bullies, they don't like it when you fight back.

    Also the mods either impose insta-bans and risk banning genuine members of the autistic community, or keep it as it is, open to the diverse personalities that make up the autistic spectrum.

    Being overly quick to penalise problem behaviour could be risky, on a site like this.

    And who judges who's a flamer/troll and who's a genuine member of the community?

    Can you tell?

    For sure?

    (and if you seriously answer yes to those questions, then you're deluded - you, I, the mod's, no-one, can know, for sure)

  • I agree with Longman. We need to be savvy and aware in order to avoid being duped. People who post highly offensive posts using foul language and verbal bullying should not be tolerated as they could cause great upset to other users.