Spam is driving me away

[countrydirt]

I rarely post around here but often visit for valuable information. It seems that the spam posts are outnumbering the pen and paper centric posts.

It's been fun, but alas, the spam is simply too much.

[Deb]

That's this particular spammer's plan. He's not linking to products, just trying to ruin the group and make people give up reading and writing here. I think it would be a great pity if you allowed him to succeed though I know that it's very annoying.

[Pendragon]

That's this particular spammer's plan. He's not linking to products, just trying to ruin the group and make people give up reading and writing here. I think it would be a great pity if you allowed him to succeed though I know that it's very annoying.

How do you know for sure who is posting the spam? It could be some AI wandering around the Internet. And countrydirt, what is the big deal about some spam posts? Just don't click on any links and you will be fine.

[Deb]

I think we know perfectly well who is posting much or most of the "spam" that we're seeing. It isn't spam. It's childish annoyance.

[FredRydr]

He makes mistakes that reveals recognizable patterns that have been seen in his prior antisocial misbehavior.

[BlkWhiteFilmPix]

That's this particular spammer's plan. He's not linking to products, just trying to ruin the group and make people give up reading and writing here. I think it would be a great pity if you allowed him to succeed though I know that it's very annoying.

I'm tired of it too and am so fed up with it I've been tempted to log out. But doing that would reward his behavior.

At some point, someone with evidence of the troll's identity, harassing behavior, etc., will take appropriate action. If the troll is using his employer's computer network or equipment, the employer may take issue with that.

In the meantime, we can resist the urge to reply to his posts.

Instead, report him as a spammer, deduct from his reputation, and set our profiles to ignore him and his aliases.

[TSherbs]

...At some point, someone with information about his identity, harassing behavior, and apparent misuse of a university's computer system will report that to the university and to the authorities.

I disagree very strongly with any such suggestion.

And over what you consider to be annoying posting on an un-moderated tiny website? And on innuendo, rumor, and less-than-incontravertable evidence? No crime other than being annoying and disliked? And how many people should be subjected to this doxing and reporting to an employer? Isn't it really the site owner that should police this place? Isn't this who you are really upset with? How many persons are we going to "report" for using work computers to post here, annoying or not? Is that some sort of new internet policing thing where we try to punish the bored-at-work?

You can guess my answer to each of these questions, but some sort of personally-directed punishment attempt toward a person in their real world for being annoying (and/or obnoxious even) is not a reasonable or ethical response. That kind of response lacks its own control.

Edited to add: I have already (in the past) written to Eric Orozco directly to notify him that member(s) here have been attempting (or threatening to) contact employers concerning the postings of other members here (the postings which have nothing to do with their employment and are not criminal in ANY way). I do not know if there were any responses (none was given me). I will continue to do the same if I see more of these suggestions or coordinated efforts posted here. This, to me, is a grave wrong.

[TSherbs]

That's this particular spammer's plan. He's not linking to products, just trying to ruin the group and make people give up reading and writing here. I think it would be a great pity if you allowed him to succeed though I know that it's very annoying.

How do you know for sure who is posting the spam? It could be some AI wandering around the Internet. And countrydirt, what is the big deal about some spam posts? Just don't click on any links and you will be fine.

You and I don't agree on some things, but on this we are in agreement. However, persons are certainly free to come and go for whatever reason they want, including frustration over spam or over any type of posting behaviors here. It's a tiny site with only a small active posting membership, and with what seems like virtually zero moderation.

[TSherbs]

I have written before that fpgeeks at its best is a small, helpful community of fountain pen enthusiasts, some of whom also find some camaraderie and level of aquaintance beyond their post exchanges. We come to know each other a bit. But at its worst it is harsh and cliquish and childish (the "likes" and reputation board don't help with this), sometimes encouraging a ganging up and bullying of the outliers. Obviously, we should promote the former behaviors and discourage the latter. I don't mean we need to avoid disagreement. I mean that we ought to avoid the feeding frenzy of group punishment behaviors, especially if we are discussing going beyond the confines of the forum itself.

[Deb]

I hope you're not including me in your accusation of a clique. If you are, I'm done. I stopped posting here altogether for a few years because of similar foolish accusations. If there's a few of us that agree on some things that doesn't make us a clique, a gang or the Mafia. There are other people here that I agree with on other matters.

Pull your fucking horns in.

[TSherbs]

I hope you're not including me in your accusation of a clique. If you are, I'm done. I stopped posting here altogether for a few years because of similar foolish accusations. If there's a few of us that agree on some things that doesn't make us a clique, a gang or the Mafia. There are other people here that I agree with on other matters.

Pull your fucking horns in.

The issue is whether outing someone to an employer for being annoying during work hours is acceptable. It's not about "who." And my "horns" were not the first ones out here.

[TSherbs]

I stopped posting here altogether for a few years...

me too, twice

some aquaintances and emails brought me back each time, this is the positive side of engagement here

and I have certainly been an asshole here at times. I disagree openly and have strong opinions and am vulgar. But threatening to go into a person's private or professional life? That is just wrong, especially since the poster is just being annoying (maybe) and the site owner provides no moderation. There are certain lines we should not cross.

[Deb]

That's your issue. It isn't mine. As regards contacting his employer I wouldn't do that but I think we're entitled to comment on the behaviour of one who has gone from trashing the group to trolling it without being accused by you of being a clique. That was one of his favourite accusations which you appear to have inherited.

All I can say about outing him is that if you bait people long enough and hard enough they will find ways to respond.

Enough. The wretch will be loving this.

[TSherbs]

That's your issue.

Indeed, and I own it.

[724Seney]

...At some point, someone with information about his identity, harassing behavior, and apparent misuse of a university's computer system will report that to the university and to the authorities.

I disagree very strongly with any such suggestion.

And over what you consider to be annoying posting on an un-moderated tiny website? And on innuendo, rumor, and less-than-incontravertable evidence? No crime other than being annoying and disliked? And how many people should be subjected to this doxing and reporting to an employer? Isn't it really the site owner that should police this place? Isn't this who you are really upset with? How many persons are we going to "report" for using work computers to post here, annoying or not? Is that some sort of new internet policing thing where we try to punish the bored-at-work?

You can guess my answer to each of these questions, but some sort of personally-directed punishment attempt toward a person in their real world for being annoying (and/or obnoxious even) is not a reasonable or ethical response. That kind of response lacks its own control.

Edited to add: I have already (in the past) written to Eric Orozco directly to notify him that member(s) here have been attempting (or threatening to) contact employers concerning the postings of other members here (the postings which have nothing to do with their employment and are not criminal in ANY way). I do not know if there were any responses (none was given me). I will continue to do the same if I see more of these suggestions or coordinated efforts posted here. This, to me, is a grave wrong.

Given the number of times Eric has been contacted about your foul mouth, forum rule breaking and boorish, offensive behavior I have to believe he just laughs when he receives something from you suggesting that someone else get banned.
Don't shi* where you sleep.

[Stands on Feet]

The troll seems to have succeeded in getting a fight started.

[Jon Szanto]

The troll seems to have succeeded in getting a fight started.

This was my thought precisely. I judge harshly on the person and/or persons who would do this to a primarily good community. The harm they have caused, and continue to cause, bothers me on a deeply conceptual level. To see it go on and on and on and on, all while knowing that the great amount of it is attributable to very few individuals, in concert with the anti-social inactivity of the owner, is both maddening and heartbreaking.

Yep, the malcontent will keep the upper hand until and unless anyone is willing to take a risk or go to the next level. I'm sick to death of the "live and let live" approach.

[TSherbs]

... To see it go on and on and on and on, all while knowing that the great amount of it is attributable to very few individuals, in concert with the anti-social inactivity of the owner, is both maddening and heartbreaking.

It is frustrating, at times, indeed. I empathize, and respect your opinion.

Yep, the malcontent will keep the upper hand

What "upper hand"? What upper hand does a troll have on anyone? Are there not other simpler ways (in one's own mind) to deny a troll the effect and control that you seem to be indicating? I grant that these are challenging to manage, but not impossible.

until and unless anyone is willing to take a risk or go to the next level

What are you suggesting? What "risk"? What "level"? It was just suggested that we are "fighting" here. I certainly am not, nor will I. My desire to not simply let what I consider to be a bad post "live and let live" was exactly why I spoke up here. We each make those decisions. But all I would ever consider is to write a moderator or owner to object, and only after I publicly stated that I was doing so. I certainly would never consider recourse outside of that (which has been my point).

[TSherbs]

Some of the frustration (which I also share) is connected to a *resentment* that we feel, but really isn't justified, IMO. We feel that the forum threads should not be treated a certain way, and that we should not have to read irrelevant posts spattered among the threads. But what is that "should not have to" based upon? Why do we take it personally, and why should that personal grievance end up being channeled into personalized retribution outside of the forum? And who is making that decision, and when, and with what kind of consequences in mind? If it is nothing more than an eye for an eye (or I might suggest a head for an annoying splinter), than we are not engaging in anything better than an exaggerated form of ill-will that the troll came to the forum with. All fora have trolls and spammers, and yes, usually more moderation. But the existence of trolls is nothing new.

What is new here is suggesting that we go after someone outside of the forum. To do so, it seems to me, you had better be 100% certain of the person's responsibility, and the behavior should be a violation of criminal law. Nothing less. The consequences of said action could be dire in the extreme, well out of proportion with the annoyance caused by a troll/spammer. And one had better not be wrong. Playing with guesses and hunches and "well, so-and-so says so" is by far not good enough.

Let it be known that EoC (if that is actually who people are insinuating is behind all this) and I have been back-channel aquaintances for years. Do we always agree? No. Do I defend everything he has posted here? No, not close. Would he defend all my stuff? No way. Have we been critical at times of each other? Yes. But this suggestion (not the first) of attempting to punish someone (I assume him, but it does not matter whom) by notifying an employer (or whatever element of one's private life) over being annoying? That is wrong and should not happen. It is not justified, no matter the level of frustration. It's born from resentment and personal animus, not reasoned judgment.

And I am not fighting with Jon in saying this.

[RobJohnson]

I am not convinced that there is a connection between the spammers and Jackson, he is not that smart.

What I am absolutely certain about is that neither party will give a damn about the arguments and angry words that have developed, for no good reason, in discussing Spammers and Jackson.