While your idea is noble, the idea cannot possibly work, as it presupposes the same people you wish to identify will not also participate by naming well intentioned folk as shills or trolls. As someone who considers themselves a good analyst of real intent behind writing, I have seen practically every well intentioned poster, i.e., someone who actually wants very bad people to meet justice, identified at one time or another as a troll or shill by someone else. I can think of a number of members which I disagree with vehemently on certain issues labeled as trolls or shills, and yet I would not identify them as same, no matter how misguided I think they are.
Its realy obvious to me who is on here, because they try to bash people straight out for their belief in Pizzagate, they cal names and degrade with fowl belittling words. They never go through any details of the Information here, and the bale after it goes any further. I think it can work if you gave me an obvious example, I will give you one. Lets stop talking about it, and do something, only the shrills and trolls will add an obvious concerned citizen. if its not obvious, than what is my friend you tell me huh???
To be candid, I don't see a lot of obvious bashing. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, it's just that I haven't seen it in an obvious way like you might have. I mean I see bashing to be sure, but not of the kind that reveals with certainty that either party is a shill in the strictest sense. People tend to run way too fast and loose with the term. Personally, I use it as seldom as possible. When I'm in doubt as to someone's real intent, I go read their posting history, samples of recent, middle, and early period, and then I form an opinion. The other thing is, even if you were successful in creating a rough list that was somewhat accurate, it's still going to contain misattributions. And further, it's apt to be obsolete within weeks. I'm not trying to knock your idea, as I'd sure like to have a way to know whose who quickly, I just don't see any practical way it can happen.
Of-coarse we dont blindly down vote whatever is reported or thrown our way, ...it will be Crystal Clear the ones who need to go, if there any doubts, why would anyone do that?, You give some good points but, I think it will be fun, addicting and once started the Obvious will appear! Maybe I am asking for to much at this time. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
view the rest of the comments →
rwb ago
While your idea is noble, the idea cannot possibly work, as it presupposes the same people you wish to identify will not also participate by naming well intentioned folk as shills or trolls. As someone who considers themselves a good analyst of real intent behind writing, I have seen practically every well intentioned poster, i.e., someone who actually wants very bad people to meet justice, identified at one time or another as a troll or shill by someone else. I can think of a number of members which I disagree with vehemently on certain issues labeled as trolls or shills, and yet I would not identify them as same, no matter how misguided I think they are.
freeagent37 ago
Its realy obvious to me who is on here, because they try to bash people straight out for their belief in Pizzagate, they cal names and degrade with fowl belittling words. They never go through any details of the Information here, and the bale after it goes any further. I think it can work if you gave me an obvious example, I will give you one. Lets stop talking about it, and do something, only the shrills and trolls will add an obvious concerned citizen. if its not obvious, than what is my friend you tell me huh???
rwb ago
To be candid, I don't see a lot of obvious bashing. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, it's just that I haven't seen it in an obvious way like you might have. I mean I see bashing to be sure, but not of the kind that reveals with certainty that either party is a shill in the strictest sense. People tend to run way too fast and loose with the term. Personally, I use it as seldom as possible. When I'm in doubt as to someone's real intent, I go read their posting history, samples of recent, middle, and early period, and then I form an opinion. The other thing is, even if you were successful in creating a rough list that was somewhat accurate, it's still going to contain misattributions. And further, it's apt to be obsolete within weeks. I'm not trying to knock your idea, as I'd sure like to have a way to know whose who quickly, I just don't see any practical way it can happen.
freeagent37 ago
Of-coarse we dont blindly down vote whatever is reported or thrown our way, ...it will be Crystal Clear the ones who need to go, if there any doubts, why would anyone do that?, You give some good points but, I think it will be fun, addicting and once started the Obvious will appear! Maybe I am asking for to much at this time. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
rwb ago
If you come up with any names, I'd certainly read a little of their posting history for a lark to see if the attribution corresponds.
freeagent37 ago
Just as soon as another one comes my way, I will send em right back here. Cool thank you!