144

submitted 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) by jordanlund@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

114 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So we've seen the complaints and the reports and boy oh boy are there complaints and reports.

I've discussed the account with the other mods and admins multiple times, and while we agree the volume is a lot, it doesn't point to a botfarm or multiple people using the account.

Obsessive? Absolutely, but not technically rule breaking... Until today.

Today they indescriminately posted the same story three times from three different sources apparently solely to flood the channel showing a decided lack of judgement.

It's a valid story from a valid source, the original has been kept here:

https://lemmy.world/post/21098916

The others have been removed as duplicates.

I'm also applying a 15 day temp ban on the account.

"15 days? That's oddly specific! What's in 15... OH!"

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 20 points 3 hours ago

I’ve handled users like this similarly in some of the communities I head up here. I try not to touch the content unless it is obvious misinformation and that violates instances rules. That said, if their content and or comments are clearly intended to create discord, pester, or pester in a passive aggressive manor, then they get the boot.

I wish we had some sort of sort filter that hid aggressively downvoted content and comments. That way the “knights of the new” could bury problematic content.

People don’t like the idea of mods having to censor users, but they also don’t want their feed full of downvoted posts or infighting.

[-] SacredHeartAttack@lemmy.world 49 points 5 hours ago

HOW do you post here 1.9k times in two months? I have like 7 posts in over a year and I feel somewhat active.

I’m not complaining about any decisions mods have made, I’m legitimately asking cause that seems crazy. 32 posts a day is a LOT.

[-] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 8 points 1 hour ago

32 posts a day is a LOT.

Honestly, that's not even that impressive... It's only 4 posts per hour over a 8 hour work day, which is completely achievable if Internet trolling is your hobby of choice.

What's really impressive is the number of comments. I won't speculate on Monk's motives (out of fear of running afoul of this community's rules) except to say that they seem extremely motivated to argue with anyone and everyone who posts a disagreeing comment. Their tactic is to bicker with any dissenting voices (without actually engaging with their arguments) to the point of exhaustion so that no one will bother engaging anymore — a very specific strategy I have to imagine is designed to shift the Overton window a particular way.

Fortunately, their efforts seem to have been mostly ineffective given the number of people around here who continue to call out their BS. So keep fighting the good fight, I guess!

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 27 points 5 hours ago

I told them in PMs that, as a mod, I self limit to 3 posts a day for fear of being seen as putting my thumb on the scale and influencing the discourse.

And that's in the groups I mod(!)

He's over that by a factor of 10+

[-] MagicShel@lemmy.zip 16 points 4 hours ago

I don't know what his deal was but anyone who is that gleefully belligerent when confronted by people who don't like what he's doing isn't really anyone I want around. Coincidently, I blocked him today. I don't think he was doing anything wrong other than sheer volume of one-note posts. But I got tired of all the comment sections being about him. And I think I've absorbed enough of his point of view for a time.

For all I know he was just trying to keep folks riled up enough to vote. But those posts didn't add to the value of the community IMO.

[-] KnightontheSun@lemmy.world 12 points 2 hours ago

For a while I didn't block them b/c I wanted to see what and how much they were posting. The shtick was indeed getting old and after seeing the glut of posts today, I blocked them. Enough is enough and I know what they are about.

Trolling. Trolling and disinformation.

[-] scarabine@lemmynsfw.com 51 points 5 hours ago

Are you familiar with toxoplasmosis? The disease that mutates into different forms so a bunch of different animals can host it and pass it along.

This is a long article but it's really good, it's worth a read and it predicted a lot of the discourse of the last decade: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/12/17/the-toxoplasma-of-rage/

The sort of gist of it is this: the more grey area / ambiguity in a topic, the more we pop our own identity into our stance on it. And so if that thing is controversy, we argue about it so much more if there's room to self-insert our identity in that grey area. It spreads and spreads to a bunch of different hosts. It becomes a meme via argument by infecting a bunch of hosts to pass it along.

And that's Monk.

Pretty early on, it was very clear that they had no actual understanding of the topics they were talking about. I tried in their first few weeks to engage with them and so did others. Only to find nothing there. No opinions, and all counter-arguments were clearly copy & pasted off of Wikipedia. Things like "we have X amount of members in Maine".

Please.

Eventually they stopped trying to engage altogether, and instead moved into a deliberate pattern of line-toeing retorts. None in good faith. But, more importantly, never with enough substance to interrupt the ensuing argument, while simultaneously always enough comment traffic to perpetuate the thread.

Monk is a memetic toxoplasmosis source vector. Through pure ineptitude or irony, I think they've accidentally turned more people against third parties than for them, but maybe that isn't their goal.

Even now there's an undercurrent of "I don't think I even disagree with them". Well, how could you? They haven't said anything worth disagreeing with, have they? What have they said, though? Not much. Nothing recognizable as an opinion in defense of the third party articles. Often, just enough to establish a veneer of plausible deniability.

It's a sophisticated form of trolling and it's recognizable to anyone with a long history of community management online. There are some people who never seem to be directly at fault for things, yet every single time you remove them, the temperature goes down.

You don't need to actually build a case against these people to know that the equation is simple: when they're around, everyone is angry. When they aren't, people get along better.

Anyway, my point is this: you can tell who is contributing in good faith and who isn't, because they will attempt to say what's on their mind. It might be the worst take you've ever heard in your life, but it has a concretion to it. Monk has no concrete substance, they simply like to stir the pot.

[-] quicklime@lemm.ee 3 points 41 minutes ago

upvoting for well articulated nuance

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 26 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Agreed. They are being intentionally passive aggressive and they are trying to create discord in this community. They often say that they expect downvotes.

IMHO, if a user is repeatedly trying to get a rise from other users, then it’s time to go.

It’s like a little bother holding a finger to your face and saying “I’m not touching you.” They’re following the rules and not hitting their sibling, but know they’re being a pest.

[-] pooperNickel@lemm.ee 12 points 4 hours ago

You've pretty much nailed it.

[-] pooperNickel@lemm.ee 46 points 6 hours ago

Firstly, thank you for that ban. Did you notice the duplicate section in my comment? Low effort comments, dismissiveness, refusing to engage in good faith even when someone treats him very respectively, and copy-pasting the same responses many times is only one of several signs this is a troll. This behavior breaks rule 4.

No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.

I do not understand how anyone could possibly look at the evidence I provided and say "nah, not a troll".

For your convenience:

Top 10 duplicate (total 617 exact and 318 fuzzy, 70% or more similar) submissions from UniversalMonk@lemmy.world found.

spoiler 'Thank you!' x 27

'Yep!' x 24

spoiler 'k' x 23

'Agreed!' x 21

spoiler 'I don't know what you mean.' x 20

'I don't have to explain anything to you. Thanks!' x 14

spoiler 'Right?' x 13

'Every vote for Harris is stealing a vote from thir...' x 12

spoiler 'Exactly!' x 11

'To cut through the nonsense and save everyone time...' x 10

[-] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 35 points 5 hours ago

I want to second this. I understand the mods prefer a case-by-case approach, but I think that leaves a very specific pathway for bad actors to exploit. Monk was posting a purely insane amount of comments along with a very high but not as insane number of posts, and almost all of it was low-value, and often copy-pasted from a previous comment.

Do the mods even have easy access to the kind of data your script was pulling? I think that may be part of the issue is that the mod tools with Lemmy are lacking/limited.

[-] Archer@lemmy.world 27 points 5 hours ago

He had a standard copypasta for people accusing him of being a troll. If that’s not trolling I don’t know what is

[-] geekwithsoul@lemm.ee 17 points 4 hours ago

Ha! Yeah - in fact it evolved and expanded to the extent of almost all of his interactions being simply copying and pasting his responses ad nauseum. Very rarely saw him say anything he hadn't already parroted back dozens and dozens of times. I kinda get why some people accused him of being a bot, because it's hard to imagine a human deriving anything out of those sorts of interactions.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 12 points 4 hours ago

The number of comments/posts makes me think they're getting paid per comment or post (or maybe per reply?)

In any case, I still find it funny that in one of their earlier posts I called Stein a Russian stooge and they took personal offense to that. (for a moment, I wondered if maybe they were stein.)

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 12 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

There are multiiple Stein Stans in the community who report anything remotely anti-Stein, even (especially?) when it's true.

load more comments (4 replies)

load more comments (10 replies)

[-] MyOpinion@lemm.ee 56 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Good they have been trolling us for a while. Also, thank you for your efforts and you are appreciated.

load more comments (41 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024

144 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19082 readers

3715 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News