good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW |
|
PerlMonks |
Re^3: Troll Warningby jeffa (Bishop) |
on Nov 17, 2005 at 23:04 UTC ( [id://509632]=note: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
(Disclaimer: this is all personal opinion if it is not apparently so.)
By that I mean it's not being done, and you've proposed no change to cause it to happen.
... but enough of them aren't that trolls continue to get big responses. And i fully believe that they will continue to get big responses even if you label the post as potentially trollish. But that's just my opinion.
You're asking people to navigate (without providing a nearby link) to another page to take an action on the current one.
I don't know what you're referring to. There's no labeling option in consideration.
Again ... take a look at who is doing the responding. We are mature, experienced Perl programmers. If we take the bait and feed a troll, we know what the consequences will be. The consideration process was put into place years ago to handle this problem, and i fully believe that it is handling the problem as best as anything can. If a human cannot always determine 100% of the time that a post is truly a trollish post, how can a program do the same? Some people just can't get enough of that negative attention, and no system is going to stop the occasional trollish node from being posted. jeffa L-LL-L--L-LL-L--L-LL-L-- -R--R-RR-R--R-RR-R--R-RR B--B--B--B--B--B--B--B-- H---H---H---H---H---H--- (the triplet paradiddle with high-hat)
In Section
Perl Monks Discussion
|
|