One Abusive Anonymous Bloke

One Abusive Anonymous Bloke, one toxic forum, a poor advertisement for ‘the labour left’.

There were generally some very good discussions at The Standard on Little: Labour to Defy TPPA.

However one of the most negative aspects of The Standard was also on display – one of their resident trolls, ‘One Anonymous Bloke’. They (their gender is uncertain) have a history of persistent personal attacks that are a major factor in The Standard being seen as an abusive toxic forum weighted heavily in favour of long term abusers.

‘One Anonymous Bloke’ chose to target one person, as has been their habit for years.  In one thread here are all their responses to ‘acrophobic’

#1

Liar – the GST increase more than clawed back the income tax cut.

Why do you tell so many lies?

#2

Something can be highly unlikely because it’s prevented by the Greens’ rules, to whit: Green Party members would have to forget that the National Party is a slow civil war upon New Zealand in order to go into coalition with them.

I expect you to fail to understand that, like a:

a: failure or,
b: liar.

Which is it?

#3

Yes, by removing the first part of my comment, you can produce a quote that makes it look as though I said something different.

Are these sort of Kindergarten pratfalls the best you can do?

Yes, they are.

“By removing the first part of my comment, you can produce a quote that makes it look as though I said something different” is very ironic given OAB’s habit of doing just that.

#4

Misrepresenting what Weka said too, eh Wormtongue.

#5

Too funny: fish, meet barrel.

#6

Labour controls the weather. You need to get out more.

#7

Of course there isn’t, you dimwit, since the TPPA is not in force all we have to go on is informed opinion (which doesn’t include yours).

The lying Prime Minister says the government (ie: taxpayers – again not you, you’re a drain on society) will fund the extra costs to keep the retail price of medicines unchanged.

If you had a clue you’d know that, and you don’t.

#8

I have plenty of clues, moran, not that you’ve provided any. For example, Northshoredoc is a better source on this subject: a better wingnut than you’ll ever be.

#9

Are you dense as well as dishonest? What part of all we have to go on is informed opinion are you having trouble with?

#10

You can call it what you like, and that says something about you. You Tory wankers want to restrain my trade to satisfy your Yankee crush: do it on your own dime, shitheel.

#11

Criticising National Party sycophancy is not xenophobia.

If you don’t know how the TPPA restrains trade you haven’t been paying attention.

#12

Please explain why you’re contradicting your lying Prime Minister. Do you think the lying Prime Minister is lying, or are you:

a: Lying or,
b: Running off at the mouth in incompetent ignorance for which you will demonstrate no personal responsibility.

Which is it Glibertard?

#13

I am, liar.

Why do you tell so many lies? Can we charitably assume that you tell so many lies because you’re utterly devoid of original thoughts or opinions, or are you in fact a mendacious wretch, like the Prime Minister?

#14

Your rote-learned lies (all of them) on the Greenhouse Effect are lies. Your rote-learned lies on Lab5’s economic competence are lies (note that I’m not saying Lab5 were economically competent, just that the rote learned lies you tell on the subject are lies). Your rote-learned lies about poverty, are lies.

Your rote-learned lies about the TPPA, are lies.

Even Bill English contradicts your rote-learned lies. Even the lying Prime Minister contradicts your rote-learned lies when it suits him.

Why is that?

#15

I already have, multiple times, on multiple threads. “This is the rainy day the government has been saving up for” ring any bells?

Your lies about welfare have been debunked so many times by so many people – check out Werewolf’s ten myths about welfare and see how many boxes you tick – pretty sure it’s all of them.

Your lies about the Greenhouse Effect come straight from the list of denier lies, as can be seen by cross-reference with Skeptical Science.

I’m inclined to be charitable and assume that you believe these lies because you’re biased and stupid, rather than that you’re deliberately mendacious, but really, who cares: kids are still dying while you tell them.

#16

For example: “many living in poverty do so because of poor choices”

All you’ve offered in support of this vile hate speech is to confess your disgusting betrayal of people who’ve turned to you for help.

Lie number one. I’ve referred to others above.

This is typical behaviour of ‘One Anonymous Bloke’, targeted personal attacks and attempts to discredit someone they choose to try and drive away. I’ve seen them do it frequently and have been on the receiving end.

They have been allowed to continue like this for years with little or no challenge from Standard moderators. It is accepted behaviour, it’s even encouraged. And it is onbe of the main reasons why The Standard is seen as a toxic forum that reflects poorly on ‘the labour left’ and by association, on Labour.

At the end of the thread One Anonymous Bloke’s behaviour was challenged:

Mark:

Easy to tell when [deleted] has been proved a liar…it gets very abusive.
Good on you acrophobic..no doubt you will get slapped with a ban shortly for a few inconvenient truths however.
☺

[You’re a sad wee misogynist, Mark. People don’t get banned here for inconvenient truths, and even if they were, I don’t see much truth in anything acrophobic has written anyway, so if a ban comes, it won’t be on those grounds. TRP]

Misogynist…really?
You have some assumption about a word I used?
OAB gets to abuse anyone exposing his/her/it’s nastiness & lies, anyone else gets a petty little telling off.
The utter failure, nastiness, hypocracy & dishonesty of the Left exposed in just a few comments.
Pfft…

[Two words, Mark. I left the word “it” undeleted, just so the readers can get an idea of how you see women. TRP]

TRP targets the use of ‘it’ while supporting OAB’s persistent personal attacks. Unfortunately this is also typical of The Standard standard.

And under protection of site moderation One Anonymous Bloke continued:

My challenge to Acrophobic is very simple: to produce evidence – not personal anecdotes or assertions – of the right wing dogma they have learned so well.

Where Bill English and the Prime Minister contradict their assertions, I feel confident in calling them lies. Where the academies of science of every country that has an academy of science contradicts the right wing dogma they have learned so well, I feel confident in calling them lies.

When Epidemiology contradicts the right wing dogma they have learned so well, I feel confident in calling them lies too.

If you don’t like that, get some personal responsibility and rebut my criticisms. Why am I obliged to tolerate or be polite in the face of lies in politics?

acrophobia responded:

So:

1. You think lied because I apparently contradict something John Key says yet you call John Key a liar?
2. You think I lied because I question some notion you have of scientific consensus. You do realise that challenging scientific theory is not only an exercise in free speech it is also part of the scientific method? Would you have accused Galileo of ‘lying’ for opposing the prevailing consensus that the earth was the centre of the universe?

If you made any criticisms of worth I would be happy to engage. Instead you resort to ad-hominem almost from the get-go, accompanied by a flurry of irrational diatribe.

My challenge to you is simple. Quote a single instance where I have lied. Just one.

One Anonymous Bloke #17:

For example: “many living in poverty do so because of poor choices”

All you’ve offered in support of this vile hate speech is to confess your disgusting betrayal of people who’ve turned to you for help.

Lie number one. I’ve referred to others above.

It’s ridiculous to call that a lie, but that’s how One Anonymous Bloke ‘argues’ against things they (presumably) disagree with, repeated accusations of lying.

This disagreement by abuse is sadly common from the left and on The Standard.

One Abusive Anonymous Bloke sadly sums up the state of left wing debate. It is also one of the most negative aspects of The Standard and it has been their trademark for years.

Kiwiblog troll

Posted on Kiwiblog:

Quite funny, but not so funny was what prompted it, a series of deliberately provocative and abusive posts over the last few days. This resulted in:

Kea (13,924 comments) says:

Lucy scares all decent and intelligent people. Her type is behind every religious inspired war, genocide, torture and horror in the world today.

She longs for a past time where she could have tortured mutilated and killed non Catholics with impunity. She is more dark and evil than most people could fathom, but some of us see straight through to her rotten hateful heart.

[DPF: This comment, and many others are unacceptable. This is your seventh strike and a three month suspension. The 10th strike is permanent inclusion. You need to change your style if you want to remain here]

DPF would have meant “The 10th strike is permanent exclusion”, his policy details Strike 10 – permanent ban.

Seems fair enough. Kiwiblog can get quite abusive at times but this is at the extreme end, and it was after repeated abuse by a recidivist – in fact this person was on the receiving end of DPF’s first strike:

Kea (13,924 comments) says:
And that Scott Chris shows you are fundamentally unsuited to make that choice. You are a coward and intellectually dishonest. Your own contributions are worthless dross for those reasons.

But I would allow you to share your brain-farts in total freedom. They make other contributors look good and fill the diversity quota [for the handicapped] at the same time.

[DPF: Thanks for the perfect example of an unacceptable comment. You’re the first person to get a strike under the new regime]

Looking through the strike list shows someone out of control – these are just a handful of the worst examples.

Kea (13,924 comments) says:

Scott Chris has pushed the “Report abusive comment” button FIFTY TIMES. What a cowardly wanker.

DPF gives me a strike but sees none of the abuse thrown at me by this, and other, abusive bigots on a daily basis. DPF has form for this sort of thing and his bullshit claims about lack of bias further erode his remaining credibility. The primary reason he demerits me is for my views.

I am out of here folks for good and are closing my account. Though I will pop in to watch KB continue its decline into a fanatical Christian anti-Muslim hate site.

[DPF: And that was strike two. You’re not yet suspended if you change your mind]

Abusing the blog owner is not a good idea, especially when they are trying a new system of trying to tone down the abuse.

Note the statement that they were ‘out of here folks for good ‘. Twelve days later:

Kea (13,924 comments) says:

stupidboy, it is you an Lucy supporting the annexation of he Crimea made under the USSR. Not me, not Andre and not Putin.

[DPF: Warning – use his proper monicker]

A day later:

Kea (13,924 comments) says:

Lucy, I know exactly what you are talking about and I told you exactly that I did not report you. I told you I was kidding.

Are you on the Sherry or something ?

You are not normally this retarded unless you have your god-goggles on.

[DPF: 2nd warning – unacceptable]

Five days later:

Kea (13,924 comments) says:

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Padriv Ustoev, in CATHOLIC South America, be-headings are so common they are not even news. Nor are mutilations and torture. All the words most dangerous cities are in CATHOLIC South America.

And sorry folks, impotently down voting and typing troll on your spittle soaked keypad will not change the reality.

[DPF: And that is strike three and a one week suspension]

That toned things down, until a month later.

Kea (13,924 comments) says:

Kowtow reaches a new low in race hate baiting.

The attacks on Hindu folk in Auckland is proof that Christian immigration is not compatible with New Zealand values and should be stopped now.

If the Jew does not like it here it can crawl back to its nest in Israel kowtow, surrounded by Muslims ! :lol: (they are Arabs themselves of course)

[DPF: And that is strike 4. Two weeks holiday]

That lesson was more quickly forgotten or ignored.

Kea (13,924 comments) says:

For the newbies, Lucia is a radical Catholic and Nazi apologist. Her view of the churches involvement in the Croatian (and German) Holocaust contradicts the findings of respected holocaust research organisations, eyewitnesses, scholars and the people who admitted what they did. That makes her a holocaust denier.

She will lie and deny facts, refusing to answer questions, to protect her precious church. She runs to DPF to try and get people who expose her banned.

[DPF: And calling someone a Nazi apologist is a good way to get banned. This is Strike 5 and a one month ban.]

A pattern of behaviour and defiance.

Kea (13,924 comments) says:

Yes, I think it is. Right now, I’m not in the mood for calling DPF’s attention to Kea’s comments. However, I’m sure as the days unfold, how I feel will change.

There you go, Kea. Annoy me enough and your own words will condemn you.

What a raging narcissist.

I have wiped better things off the sole of my shoe than a hate filled harpy like you. You are filth. Go fuck yourself.

[DPF: And that is Strike 6, just a day after you are back from Strike 5. That is a two month suspension]

And two and a bit months later was yesterdays ban, which won’t have been a surprise considering the whole day leading up to it in General Debate 19 April 2015.

The Daily Blog moderation change

The Daily Blog has announced a change to it’s moderation.

Commenting on TDB

We have a new moderator who will focus on all moderation on comments from now on – ‘Scarletmod’ will do our moderation.

We will also crack down on personal abuse between commentators, as well as sexist, racist and homophobic language.

Crazy comments on the truth behind 9-11, Jews running the planet, climate change denial and chemtrails won’t make it past moderation.

Basic rule is we don’t feed trolls.

Cracking down on abuse seems to be spreading, with Whale Oil and Kiwiblog pledging similar action over the last few months.

Of particular note is a switch of moderators, this presumably means that Martyn Bradbury is reducing his control – he seems to have become somewhat subdued since the election result confounded his overly optimistic predictions.

One could wonder if his some of his pre-election predictions would qualify as ‘crazy comments’.

Each blog can have whatever commenting rules it chooses, and exclude anyone they want. Bradbury’s moderation was known to silently filter out comments and he also banned commenters, including me. Disagreeing seemed to be a censorable sin.

Forbidding things like ‘climate change denial’ could easily be used as an excuse to exclude alternate views. The topic of climate change is complex and evolvin and should be debated openly and widely, not limited to one side.

‘Basic rule is we don’t feed trolls’ could be ominous – ‘troll’ can have various meanings, one common one in practice being “I don’t want you here saying things I don’t like’. It is a common form of abuse absent any argument.

On trolls and lprent

New Study: Internet Trolls Are Often Machiavellian Sadists

In the past few years, the science of Internet trollology has made some strides. Last year, for instance, we learned that by hurling insults and inciting discord in online comment sections, so-called Internet “trolls” (who are frequently anonymous) have a polarizing effect on audiences, leading to politicization, rather than deeper understanding of scientific topics.

That’s bad, but it’s nothing compared with what a new psychology paper has to say about the personalities of so-called trolls themselves.

The research, conducted by Erin Buckels of the University of Manitoba and two colleagues, sought to directly investigate whether people who engage in trolling are characterized by personality traits that fall in the so-called “Dark Tetrad”: Machiavellianism (willingness to manipulate and deceive others), narcissism (egotism and self-obsession), psychopathy (the lack of remorse and empathy), and sadism (pleasure in the suffering of others).

It is hard to underplay the results: The study found correlations, sometimes quite significant, between these traits and trolling behavior. What’s more, it also found a relationship between all Dark Tetrad traits (except for narcissism) and the overall time that an individual spent, per day, commenting on the Internet.

And lprent has commented on this at The Standard:

BTW: Just finished reading an article about a nice study about the personality defects of trolls. It turns out that they tend strongly towards the sociopathic and sadistic. What a surprise. They certainly bring out the sadistic responses from me.

That’s not just commenting, that’s bragging. And it’s not just lprent, he’s the head troll at The Standard but openly supports Labour-friendly trolls and trolling.

And ironically it’s on a post where lprent appends:

lprent: Putting this post on moderation.
So I will personally select the comments that are allowed through here to ensure that I will personally get involved in the fun.

That’s likely to be more fun for a Labourite than worrying about the big news of the day.