Chief technician, moderator amd mouthpiece at The Standard, Lynn Prentice (lprent) sometimes talks about the culture of online forums. Obviously these cultures vary widely. But the culture at The Standard is largely dictated by lprent and a handful of like minded regulars.
In lprent’s own words:
[lprent: Instead you act like a complete fucktard critic. You have no ideas. Have no intelligence. So basically you sit on the sidelines jerking off and laughing at your own pathetic jokes. Would that be an accurate assessment?
Somehow I think that it would be the common opinion of your arsehole behaviour. ]BTW: You are bigoted sleazeball with the approximate social skills of a female hyena in heat. And since I have the time, I’m going to reserve your comments for the next few weeks for some social training.22 January 2013 at 11:55 am[lprent: But seriously, a degree would probably do you good. It might help lift your conversation out of the dry old hole that your life appears to be from your comments. The level of frustrated bilious crap you push out in your comments tends to indicate someone who is doing fuck all of any use in their life. And it is always irritating to see people wasting their abilities. ]
Personally I have called a few people nuts over the last 5 years. But it is a small fraction of the people I have described as wankers, fools, gormless or idiots. I prefer the more precise expressions…
I spent quite a lot of time embroiled in flamewars in 80′s; unfortunately (mostly) young males seem to love the damn things. Eventually I found several ways of making them dissipate. They usually involve being a bigger arsehole than the flamers and discouraging them from wanting to start a war again because they could never be sure about how close the snippers would get to their testicles.
[lprent: You had a go at one of the authors for no apparent reason and I suspect simply because you'd be fairly sure that she won't do anything nasty.
However I have some time today for similar petty behaviour, so I reserved your comments so I could return the favour and to demonstrate what a complete fuckwit behaviour that is. I'd just embellish all of your comments with my own observations on you.
Looking at the workload I may be able to keep this up for the rest of the week. And if I can't then I can just ban....
It is petty I know. But it seems like it is more likely to penetrate your blockhead that you don't attack authors personally than a banning. ]
That’s just from one thread, lprent comments and moderates spasmodically but can sometimes be hard out at it.
And that sets the tone for The Standard.
And the nasty abusive behaviour that lprent boasts about is from a position of power. He was written into the site rules that challenging a ‘moderator’ risks gettting abused and banned so you have no right of reply. As this demonstartes (same day, another thread).
WTF? I get banned for a week for that? Which policy did I break?
[lprent: This one
"Arguing with moderation is a darwinian trait that usually results in a rapid education about who runs the site (regardless which of your many pseudonym’s you use)"
and this one
"Generally wasting a moderators time is just not a good idea. We’re there to deal with isolated problems. People persistently sucking up our voluntary time won’t like the results."
Irish could have explained why he was doing whatever he was doing. However Irish is of the view that telling someone something that they should already know doesn't really help them. I would have just taken the opportunity to torment you rather than banning. Irish doesn't see the fun in that, can't be bothered wasting his time educating people about what moderators can do, and so he is somewhat more abrupt. You take your chances on who is moderating.. ]
He openly brags about having the power to jump on anyone he doesn’t like or want commenting, hypocritically breaking his own rules just because he can.
And others follow his lead. Favoured commenters can abuse and flame and disrupt as much as they like, with impunity. Because they know they have the heavy hand of the chief blog trog to protect them.
And one who regularly takes advantage of this protection for being abusibe is Te Reo Putake
Te Reo Putake …
Well, call them a shower of shit, then, bad. Abuse based on body size is still abuse. You’re not the kind of person to call someone a (black/paki/gay/etc.) wanker, are you? So have a think about the nature, and consequences, of our capitalist society, which is currently based on a culture of endless consumption.
Look, I think you’re a good person, so that’s why I raised it in a non-confrontational way. You are capable of understanding the argument and I really hope you (and others reading this) will have a bit of a think on it.
Dealing with a ‘friend’ so non-confrontational. Not so if deemed a ‘foe’. Like this disgustingly abusive link dissing someone TRP doesn’t like:
Te Reo Putake
That’s worse than usual but Te Reo Putake is one of the most frequently abusive resident trolls at The Standard. And he is a Labour Party member who promotes Labour leadership lines. The Standard culture and Labour activists hand in hand.
Like lprent Te Reo Putake is representative of a nasty side of politics, prevalent at The Standard and also prevalent in Labour caucus, where ‘foes’ can be viciously put down.
And that behaviour is boasted about and supported by the culture of The Standard.
And they wonder why journalists don’t take them very seriously.
And they wonder why ex party officials like Mike Williams, and party leader David Shearer, can dismiss them all as nutters. The obvious culture of The Standard makes that easy.