trolls - Cultivating Community2024-03-29T02:36:32Zhttps://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/feed/tag/trollsWhy I Don't Like The Term "Troll"https://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/why-i-dont-like-the-term-troll2014-02-26T17:57:37.000Z2014-02-26T17:57:37.000ZCrystalhttps://cultivate.ning.com/community/CrystalC<div><p>I'm finding more and more that I'm uncomfortable with the way that the term "troll" is becoming a catch-all word for "person who's doing something I don't like." It's an easy word to use: say "troll" and everyone says "Ahh," and nods their head in empathy. <a href="http://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/dealing-with-trolls-4-snippits" target="_self">I've used this shorthand myself</a>. And I'm resolving to stop using it and find out what's really behind the "troll." </p>
<p><a href="http://knowyourmeme.com/photos/187824-some-men-just-want-to-watch-the-world-burn" target="_blank"><img src="http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/187/824/media_http26mediatumb_uafbm.jpg.scaled500.jpg" class="align-right" style="padding: 5px;" width="257" height="206"></a>I think the turning point for me has been the recent Ars Technica article summing up a Canadian psychology journal article. Even the title is irksome: "<a href="http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/02/science-confirms-online-trolls-are-horrible-people-also-sadists/" target="_blank">Science confirms: Online trolls are horrible people (also, sadists!)</a>" Almost every commentary I saw on the piece took the form of "A-ha! I was right! Trolls are terrible, awful, no-good people!"</p>
<p>While it's true that there are some people on the internet who just really enjoy causing, stoking, and/or watching chaos happening online, that number is relatively small (and fairly concentrated). To give some anecdotal perspective, GetSatisfaction founders Lane Becker and Thor Muller recently spoke at an event about their early experiences at the company. They found that the moment they encountered their first real troll, a member whose sole purpose appeared to be to cause disruption and discontent and could not be reasoned with, was about 50,000 users in. Becker described that as ultimately uplifting: yeah, they had a troll, but the other 49,999 people in the communities were pretty decent human beings. </p>
<p>Labeling a member as a troll is dehumanizing, a dangerous mindset for community managers to get into. We are literally saying (albeit subconsciously) "this member doesn't deserve to be seen as another human being, but as a deformed, inhuman <em>thing</em>." It's become such a loaded word that once it enters a conversation, it taints what we hear afterwards. Once someone is labeled a "troll," anything they say starts to be viewed through troll-tinted glasses, even when they are being fairly reasonable. Instead of encountering a disruptive user and immediately jumping to this: </p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1282125?profile=original" target="_self"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1282125?profile=RESIZE_480x480" width="400" class="align-center"></a></p>
<p></p>
<p>Let's look at ways that we can figure out why this person is causing a disruption. </p>
<ul>
<li>Is this member upset about something involving your product/community? If so, what's causing their frustration and how can you help them? Does a new product not work like the old product did? Offer them some help getting familiar with it. Are instructions not as clear as they could be? Look at how you can revise them.</li>
<li>Is there a misunderstanding or a mistake happening? Is there a way you can prevent that in the future? </li>
<li>Does the member need to feel that someone's listening to what they're saying? How can you show them you're listening?</li>
</ul>
<p>Almost every article about traits or skills necessary for community management lists Empathy pretty high up. Make sure to turn your empathy filter on before labeling someone as a troll - you might just turn their behavior around. </p>
<p><span class="font-size-3">What are your thoughts? Do you think "Troll" is a necessary definition in community management or are you going to rethink casual use of it? </span></p>
<p></p>
<p><em>Images via <a href="http://knowyourmeme.com">Know Your Meme</a>, <a href="http://dubbledeckerbus.tumblr.com/post/46534672104" target="_blank">Tumblr</a></em></p></div>How To Handle Troublemakershttps://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/how-to-handle-troublemakers2014-01-13T20:53:14.000Z2014-01-13T20:53:14.000ZRichard Millingtonhttps://cultivate.ning.com/community/RichardMillington<div><p><span class="font-size-3">This topic comes up a lot. How do you manage people causing problems in your community?</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-3">There are remarkably few options.</span></p>
<ul>
<li><span class="font-size-3"><b>Do nothing.</b> There is a difference between causing friction and doing irreversible damage to the community. If they’re in the former, let it go. You’re not the opinion police.</span></li>
<li><span class="font-size-3"><b>Kick them out and ban them.</b> If they are doing real damage to the community, inciting hatred, planning terrorist atrocities, engaging in illegal activities, or insulted your parents – boot them.</span></li>
<li><span class="font-size-3"><b>Suspend them.</b> You don’t always have to kick people out, just suspend them from posting for a few days. Do this often enough and they will either lose interest in the community altogether, or recant their past behaviour and work for the common good.</span></li>
<li><span class="font-size-3"><b>Punish them.</b> Every time they do something wrong, reduce their karma points, prevent them from posting, reduce their post counts, change their profile picture, or simply edit their messages to something funnier – or just delete them entirely.</span></li>
</ul>
<p><br> <a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1282052?profile=RESIZE_480x480" target="_self" width="400"><img src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1282052?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="600" class="align-center"></a></p>
<ul>
<li><strong><span class="font-size-3">Reason with them.</span></strong> <span class="font-size-3">Not you, the community. Ask a few regular members what damage they believe Mr. X is doing and present quotes (anonymously) to the person. They might see the light of day.</span></li>
<li><span class="font-size-3"><b>Sidetrack them.</b> Put them in charge of incredibly irrelevant projects, unimpressive forums, or agree to let them voice their opinions in their own column/forum.</span></li>
<li><span class="font-size-3"><b>Let the community decide. “</b>Well beloved community, do you want this member to continue doing what s/he has been doing? Or should we kick him/her out?”</span></li>
<li><span class="font-size-3"><b>Bribe them.</b> If you stop doing {x}, I’ll give you your own forum, VIP status, extra karma points, a regular column.</span></li>
</ul>
<p><span class="font-size-3">Two more thoughts. (1) Be careful that the behaviour you don’t like and the behaviour the community doesn’t like align. (2) Just because the community doesn’t like one person’s behaviour doesn’t mean his behaviour is wrong.</span></p></div>Are Comments Bad for Science?https://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/are-comments-bad-for-science2013-09-26T18:40:04.000Z2013-09-26T18:40:04.000ZAllison Leahyhttps://cultivate.ning.com/community/allisonleahy<div><p><em>Popular Science</em> recently declared that it is <a href="http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-09/why-were-shutting-our-comments" target="_blank">shutting off comments</a> because "comments can be bad for science." The logic driving this decision is that less informed, quick-to-react readers may dominate the discussion and lead others astray. "Even a fractious minority wields enough power to skew a reader's perception of a story," states <em>Popular Science</em>'s Online Editor Suzanne LaBarre. The claim is supported by Dominique Brossard's <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcc4.12009/full" target="_blank">study</a> on how reader perceptions about science are affected by online comments: </p>
<div class="para">
<blockquote>
<p>The Internet has the potential to foster discussion and deliberation among far-reaching audiences in spaces such as the comments section of news items and blog posts. However, such discussions are not always rational. Discussions on the Internet can take an uncivil route, with offensive comments or replies impeding the democratic ideal of healthy, heated discussion (Papacharissi, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcc4.12009/full#jcc412009-bib-0033" rel="references:#jcc412009-bib-0033" class="referenceLink" title="Link to bibliographic citation" shape="rect">2004</a>; Shils, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcc4.12009/full#jcc412009-bib-0045" rel="references:#jcc412009-bib-0045" class="referenceLink" title="Link to bibliographic citation" shape="rect">1992</a>).</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="para">
<blockquote>
<p>The question remains as to whether online incivility affects the opinions of “lurkers,” or people who read online discussions without participating in them. Smith and his colleagues (<a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcc4.12009/full#jcc412009-bib-0049" rel="references:#jcc412009-bib-0049" class="referenceLink" title="Link to bibliographic citation" shape="rect">2009</a>) argue that lurkers are in fact participating in deliberation when reading others' comments because a large part of rational discussion consists of reflecting on others' opinions, which may or may not coincide with lurkers' own opinions. In other words, audiences reading uncivil language in blog comments may find the messages hostile and make judgments about the issue based on their own preexisting values rather than on the information at hand. This may develop polarized perceptions on issues among different audience segments that hold different values.</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="para">
<p>While a few of Brossard's hypotheses were debunked by the study, she did discover that reader's perceptions towards science are shaped in the online blog setting not only by top-down information, but by civil or uncivil viewpoints, as well. </p>
<p>Most community managers are aware of the <a href="http://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/influencing-community-members-video" target="_self">power of influence</a>. Couldn't these same principles of social influence be applied by moderators to encourage proactive, meaningful conversation? And where these efforts fail, PopSci moderators could block or remove detractors. While the Internet opens doors for public deliberation of emerging concepts and technologies, it also gives a new voice to non-expert, and sometimes rude, individuals. But this is the beauty of the Internet, no?</p>
<p>Instead of removing the opportunity to debate and add context to a thought-provoking scientific article, I would have liked to see PopSci either go the community management route and/or replace open comments with a click-to-load commenting system. At least this way casual readers could absorb the content and move on without noticing or engaging with the comments. The community would remain whole.</p>
</div>
<p>PopSci invites us to voice our opinions and commentary on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, Pinterest, and via email, but surely they understand the <a href="http://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/facebook-vs-a-custom-community-quantity-vs-quality" target="_self">limitations of these mediums</a>?</p>
<p>How do you think this decision will impact readership? Will more websites follow <em>Popular Science's </em>lead and remove commenting?</p>
<p></p>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p><a href="https://twitter.com/JimNX74205">@JimNX74205</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/PopSci">@PopSci</a> Interaction with the readers is important. This isn't the best solution. Make them sign in, maintain a profile instead</p>
— Selemir (@DS_Scriggler) <a href="https://twitter.com/DS_Scriggler/statuses/382556615926231040">September 24, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p>Those who think <a href="https://twitter.com/PopSci">@PopSci</a> shutting off comments is insane have clearly never written about, oh, climate change for <a href="https://twitter.com/PopSci">@PopSci</a></p>
— Seth Fletcher (@seth_fletcher) <a href="https://twitter.com/seth_fletcher/statuses/382574767426924545">September 24, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p><a href="https://twitter.com/PopSci">@PopSci</a> FWIW, I approve. Conversation about science is better when we don't have to keep stopping to defend scientific inquiry.</p>
— Erica Friedman (@Yuricon) <a href="https://twitter.com/Yuricon/statuses/382568234429337600">September 24, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p>A sad repercussion of loss of civility and polarizing comments online-Why We're Shutting Off Our Comments <a href="http://t.co/DiWDGdrjya">http://t.co/DiWDGdrjya</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/PopSci">@popsci</a></p>
— Laura Damschroder (@schrodster33) <a href="https://twitter.com/schrodster33/statuses/383321746964635648">September 26, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<p>The ubiquitous, vocal and ignorant minority will think it's won. "Why We're Shutting Off Our Comments" <a href="http://t.co/n9vlm6L1av">http://t.co/n9vlm6L1av</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/PopSci">@popsci</a></p>
— Maya H. (@mambolica) <a href="https://twitter.com/mambolica/statuses/383305885465862144">September 26, 2013</a></blockquote>
<script charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" type="text/javascript">
</script>
</div>Dealing with Trolls: 4 Snippitshttps://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/dealing-with-trolls-4-snippits2013-06-13T16:00:00.000Z2013-06-13T16:00:00.000ZCrystalhttps://cultivate.ning.com/community/CrystalC<div><img src="https://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/2208206?profile=RESIZE_400x&width=400"></div><div><p>Trying to determine what to say to disruptive community members can sometimes cause the worst cases of writer's block. You want to be an enforcer, but you also want to be a friendly face they can come to with help. Here are four sample snippits that can help start you on the road to a well-written response to a troll. </p>
<p><strong>Have a set of community guidelines.</strong> <a href="http://cultivate.ning.com/ning-blog/7-tips-for-developing-your-community-guidelines?context=category-best+practices" target="_self">Guidelines</a> give you something to point to when you need to handle a disturbance and, if well-enforced, give you backup when members find themselves on the wrong end of the community law. When you see a troll wreaking havoc or members reacting to a troll defensively, speak up and remind everyone of the guidelines and what action you might need to take soon.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sample Snippit:</p>
<p>"While we definitely encourage members to share their opinions, the first rule in our community guidelines is to Play Nice. You can have differing opinions without resorting to name calling. I know we all want to get back on topic, so let's bring this to a civil place. If the discussion continues to get out of hand, this thread will be shut down." <span><br /></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Have some empathy.</strong> Is the person you're dealing with really a troll? Or are they just not getting it? If you think you can turn your troll into a productive member of the community, reach out to them. For example, I once had a community member that was contributing to wiki pages by deleting all the existing text then copying and pasting text from Wikipedia. It wasn't a malicious action, he was just a kid and didn't understand why that wasn't okay. A few emails turned what could have become a rage-react scenario (if I'd just cut him off without communicating) into a teaching opportunity that ultimately produced a more conscientious community member.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sample Snippit: </p>
<p>"Hi, I noticed that you've been having some trouble with editing pages. While your contributions are appreciated, it's not really kosher to just copy what other people created. Nor do members appreciate it when you delete their hard work. A better way to make edits would be to pick a small section of a page and do some research on it yourself. Quote Wikipedia or other websites where appropriate, but make sure most of the language is coming from you. It'll sound better that way, too. If you have any questions, let me know!"</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Keep an eye on self-promoters.</strong> A community member who comes in and diverts all discussions back to themselves can be the biggest turn-off to a community. You don't want to react too quickly, though, because self-promoters <em>can</em> be turned around. It's up to your discretion (and your community guidelines) as to whether you delete the offending post, but whatever course you take, a private message should follow. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sample Snippit: </p>
<p>"Thanks for your contribution and welcome to the community. Your blog looks great, but to keep discussions on track and topic here, we have a no self-promotion policy. If it's relevant to the topic at hand, feel free to share a link to a specific post or other piece of content, but off-topic posts that are just links to your blog will be deleted."</p>
</blockquote>
<p><strong>Be transparent.</strong> When a troll is set on creating drama within the community, you want to make sure that the consequences you hand out don't create more drama themselves. If you have to ban someone after a high-profile blowup, make sure that your reasons for doing so are clear.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Sample Snippit: </p>
<p>"UserA was a valued member of our community for a long time, but after the recent incident, had to be banned from the community. We tried to work with UserA to address their concerns and problems, but no solution could be reached and UserA became too disruptive to the community. We understand that many of you may be upset about this and welcome you to share your feelings in a manner consistant with our community guidelines, but this decision will not be changed."</p>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>(<i>Image: <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/tamaleaver/6288497038/">Troll Ave</a>, adapted from a Creative Commons <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/deed.en">Attribution (2.0)</a> image from tamaleaver's photostream</i>)</p>
</div>