If you think someone is trolling, just click abuse on the thread and we'll look into it. Just remember that critically thinking on a subject isn't necessarily trolling. We've had reports (not from you) on people who where simply discussing or debating the legal issues that we didn't see as trolling.
If the case is strong, debating the details will strengthen your argument and shore up your case. If the case is not strong, it will expose holes you can fill.
Thank you for pointing this out.
As my tagline leaves out, it wouldn't have been much good if Paul Revere had been gunned down as a troll. It's bad enough dodging musket balls from head-in-sand types, let alone the grapeshot of the Mods! :-)
If you think someone is trolling, just click abuse on the thread and we’ll look into it.
***Is the process out in the open or is it cloaked in such a way that we can only see the end result? I prefer an open system, lots of daylight, so that others can learn from the mistakes of current trolls and, perhaps, people like me might learn what constitutes trolldom if we have the wrong idea. That brings up another question — is this the Free Republic definition of Troll?
Just remember that critically thinking on a subject isn’t necessarily trolling.
***Quite the contrary. It’s the absense of critical thinking that is trolling, as set forward in the definition and the first thing mentioned, “An individual who ...regularly posts specious arguments”.
We’ve had reports (not from you) on people who where simply discussing or debating the legal issues that we didn’t see as trolling.
***So it appears there’s a cloaked approach rather than out in the open. How will all of us learn if the process is hidden? It doesn’t strike me as healthy that we could pull the trigger on 25 trolls and it would be a mystery to them as well as those arguing alongside them. People should have a chance to change their behavior.
If the case is strong, debating the details will strengthen your argument and shore up your case. If the case is not strong, it will expose holes you can fill.
***Do you mean the case for whether a person is a troll? Or do you mean the case for an issue? If we’re constantly covering the same arguments then it’s a clear case “that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand”.
It is one thing to request clarification of an issue and state you don’t agree.
It is another to take every sentence of every post and state an opposing statement. Argueing IS NOT debating an issue.
OTOH when the poster asks a questions is given material to read that answers that question...and immediatly posts a negative without reading said material. It is obvious that the person is only trying to disrupt the flow of the thread. This is a technique used by posters who appear and disappear in multiples.
I posted to one earlier after giving them a link to this thread which they obviously ignored (no one reads that fast):
It’s like a pregnant girl who doesn’t know which one of the football team is her baby’s daddy......swears she’s not a slut.
Compare your postings with those described by the moderator’s post...
If it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck....It sure ain’t no elephant