Option to ban a specific troll from the comments (Updated)

Update: The poll closed early at fred’s request. fred is now banned.


In order to improve the quality of the comment section, yet uphold the ideals of free speech and democracy, readers of the blog Restructure! can vote on whether commenter ‘fred’ should be banned. I will honour the results of the vote. (If the motion to ban fred does not pass, I can put it to vote again sometime in the future.) fred may appeal the ban by submitting a persuasive essay on whether or not minorities are at a disadvantage within a democracy.

Here is a sample comment by fred:

At first, I wasn’t sure whether you were black. But after reading that last comment it’s obvious. Its devoid of reason and logic. […]

The poll closes in a week.

Some thoughts on voting by Spider Jerusalem of Transmetropolitan are below the fold (trigger warning for a description of sexual assault with a weapon). Vote first, then, if you choose to, read the comic.


''You want to know about voting. I’m here to tell you about voting.''
''Imagine you’re locked in a huge underground nightclub filled with sinners, whores, freaks and unnameable things that rape pit bulls for fun. And you ain’t allowed out until you all vote on what you’re going to do tonight.''
''You like to put your feet up and watch ‘Republican Party Reservation’. They like to have sex with normal people using knives, guns, and brand-new sexual organs that you did not know existed.''
''So you vote for television, and everyone else, as far as your eye can see, votes to fuck you with switchblades.''
''That’s voting. You’re welcome.''

45 Responses to “Option to ban a specific troll from the comments (Updated)”

  1. JP Says:

    comic made me laugh.

    I haven’t decided which way i’ll vote because, to be honest, i’ve learnt heaps here from responses to fred’s comments.

  2. numol Says:

    I vote to ban him. He’s useless — I agree that a lot can be learned from responses to trolls, but the same stuff could be learned from other sites and in less upsetting ways.

    AFAIK, the TransGriot does not ever let trolls comment on her blog, but she does respond to their words openly in her “nuke a troll” posts when she feels a response is needed, so that’s one other way it could be done.

  3. Robin Says:

    The comic made me giggle. But I’m kind of a freak, so no surprise. ;)

    I’ve reached the conclusion that Fred will cling to willful ignorance until the day he dies, so there’s not much point in giving him a soapbox.

  4. Anti-Status Quo Voice Says:

    Re: Voting to Ban
    Fred…

    I find him absolutely frustrating and obnoxious.

    Yet, after reading JP’s comments…fred’s racist discourse is indeed ironically informative and educational!

    I think I said this once before in another thread comment, that sometimes we need to have racism come to the surface, so Anti-Racists can interrogate it….

    fred has become a “brilliant” “case-study” in himself, demonstrating to POCs and White people out there exactly what the racist mentality / dominant ideology looks like!

    He actually, illuminates what racism – White privilege is all about—the rhetorical strategies that racist ideology mobilizes, how White privilege formulates and “masks” itself.

    I’ve never seen rhetoric, except in books and films, so laced with an obsession for behaviour, logic/objectivity, stats, biology, genetics, eugenics, all mobilized to “prove” the “difference” / “inferiority” of People of Colour.

    I find his contradictory nature almost intriguing to the point I have to rise to challenge in dismantling it.

    As for the rebuttal to me, “I wasn’t sure whether you were black. But after reading that last comment it’s obvious. Its devoid of reason and logic”. Well frankly, I wasn’t offended by that…He has said worse things…

    But I found it “typical behaviour” and “reasoning” of his race…If he wants to “speak” and “represent” his race in this way…well, he isn’t doing his group any favours…Yet paradoxically, his discourse is always begging POCs to recognize White people as “benevolent” and “sincere” —almost entreating us to “love” him.

    …I am more for keeping him under moderation and make him submit that persuasive essay..

    You could bar fred…but he would be soon replaced with another similar voice.

    Dr. Restructure, I wish we could dissect fred’s brain so we could locate the specific gene that creates people like him. He is a most interesting “Darwinian specimen” needed for closer “inspection” in furthering Anti-racist science.

  5. Jayn Says:

    Yeah, but maybe that other voice would be more amusing.

    It is weird the White idea of being the ‘benevolent’ figure that helps others. It’s an easy one to fall for, and I think a clear remnant from the colonial era. Missionaries also land into that role. It’s almost hilarious how we seem to try and fill that role again, even when trying to alleviate suffering that we caused in the first place from that same position.

    Dammit, I had more to say but lost my train of thought. Not really a topic for this post anyways, though.

  6. Anti-Status Quo Voice Says:

    I’m sure fred is just loving all the controversy he creates…all the attention we’ve lavished on him.

    Look at all the psychic-space he’s taken up so far…!

    I think fred and others like him just need to be held accountable for what they say in the public realm…

  7. Katie Says:

    There are plenty enough places on the internet where “Fred” can spew that stuff. I understand the value of learning how to argue with various examples of racist ideology, but some things aren’t deserving of any response. I think you have to draw the line and say some things are just unacceptable on their face. He’s like a kid and in that way isn’t going to learn respect until it is demanded of him. He has to learn some limits. Ban.

  8. jon Says:

    What Katie said.

  9. Katie Says:

    This is a different Katie.

    I say ban him. I am so tired of reading his stuff – it’s not as though I don’t have to deal with people like him on a daily basis.

  10. dav Says:

    How dare bring his annoying hatefacts in the glorious PC paradise. Doesn’t he know that if we shame whites enough they’ll stop emanating esotericall racism waves that mysteriously make our darker skinned “perfect innocents of supreme competence” fail in life. Just a few more rhetorical jabs about white privilege and the school gap will be closed, crime rates will drop and blacks will overwhelm MIT. Total equality will reign and the lamb will lay with the lion. Amen

  11. jewamongyou Says:

    Wouldn’t it be more constructive to lay out all his arguments and demonstrate how they are wrong?

  12. Restructure! Says:

    jewamongyou,

    fred’s sample comment shows that he knows why it’s wrong, but he’s posting it anyway to troll.

  13. fred Says:

    restructure writes, fred’s sample comment shows that he knows why it’s wrong, but he’s posting it anyway to troll.

    “fred’s sample comment” was a correct assessment. I also correctly assessed ASQV’s gender and sexual orientation by the content of his comments. As you well know since you deleted the comment in which I suggested he might be homosexual — and that was before he outed himself. That makes me 3 for 3 on ASQV.

    So was my assessment really just trolling? Or do you just think so because I gave his lack of “logic and reason” as my evidence? Well, all I can say is that I can often tell race, gender, etc from the content of one’s comments as easily as I can tell it from the sound of one’s voice on the phone.

    Here is the crucial bit that you namecallers are missing — I’m really not trolling. I’m simply arguing my position as I see it. Of course, there is a little snark thrown in. But not any worse than what has been said about me on this thread. And I’ve certainly never said anything this blatant.

    https://restructure.wordpress.com/2009/01/09/canadians-tolerate-white-racism-against-blacks-even-in-toronto/#comment-6163

    As others have said, if you don’t like my arguments then deconstruct them and demonstrate where I am mistaken. Try to kick my ass. And then let others decide for themselves. That’s why I am here and I enjoy the opportunity. Some people will agree with me and others will agree with you. I’m fine with that. Why aren’t you?

  14. Restructure! Says:

    I deleted that comment because you used a homophobic slur, which is explicitly banned per the comment policy.

  15. Anti-Status Quo Voice Says:

    fred Says:
    December 28, 2010 at 9:40 pm

    I’m simply arguing my position as I see it. Of course, there is a little snark thrown in.
    ………………

    Evidently fred, you’ve learned nothing.

    Ban!

  16. fred Says:

    Are you sure? I don’t recall using a homophobic slur.

  17. Restructure! Says:

    fred, this was your comment (reproduced here for illustrative purposes):

    ASQV writes, Given fred’s incessant trolling on previous blogs, I find it weird and contradictory that he can all of a sudden “empathize” with the oppression of homophobia (which I really don’t believe) but not others…

    First, you say I’m a homosexual. Then you say I’m faking “empathy” for them. And you’re going to call ~me~ “weird and contradictory”??? I’ll tell you what’s weird — your obsession with homos. You’ve yet to write a comment that doesn’t mention them. And one of your comments was quite graphic. o_O

  18. fred Says:

    That’s my comment alright. I didn’t realize that was a slur. To me its just an abbreviation.

  19. Katie Says:

    Second Katie here.

    It’s also massively derailing, aside from the hate-speech nature of the comments. He throws in just enough argumentation that the analytical among us feel compelled to tangle with his comments, and usually end up far from the original intent of the posts. I don’t want every comments section I read to become “let’s make fred see the error of his ways,” and while that’s of course an overstatement, I do feel like there’s an inordinate amount of energy expended on him for the level of discourse he’s bringing to the table.

  20. fred Says:

    katie writes, It’s also massively derailing,

    I’ll tell you what’s “massively derailing”. restructure couldn’t address my comment and she couldn’t let it hang out there. So she derailed it with a flaky allegation of homophobia.

    As others have said, if you don’t like my arguments then deconstruct them and demonstrate where I am mistaken. Try to kick my ass. And then let others decide for themselves. That’s why I am here and I enjoy the opportunity. Some people will agree with me and others will agree with you. I’m fine with that. Why aren’t you?

  21. jewamongyou Says:

    Are there other far-conservative, race-realist posters who are less abrasive? It seems to me that diversity of opinion is what makes the blogosphere interesting. So I guess my question is:
    “Is this proposed ban due to Fred’s opinions or his disrespect for other posters?”
    Fred cited a post by africanblackmilitant that seems at least as offensive as anything you accuse Fred of writing.
    I’ll admit, I have not been very active in this forum so I don’t have the same deep perspective as the rest of y’all. I’m just trying to understand the difference. Thanks.

  22. Restructure! Says:

    fred, you are trolling even in this comment thread when you write, “Well, all I can say is that I can often tell race, gender, etc from the content of one’s comments as easily as I can tell it from the sound of one’s voice on the phone.”

  23. Restructure! Says:

    jewamongyou,

    africanblackmilitant has been banned, though, for being a liar and a troll.

  24. Restructure! Says:

    jewamongyou,

    Also, fred appears uninterested in actually debating the topic and resorts to sophistry. He doesn’t address my points, and just fixates on the fact that I called him racist.

    He believes he can tell someone’s race by the content of their comments and the sound of their voice on the phone, and he also once claimed that he was “immune to subliminal messages”. There really isn’t a point in pointing out the error of someone’s thoughts if they are completely delusional and out of touch with reality.

  25. jewamongyou Says:

    “africanblackmilitant has been banned, though, for being a liar and a troll.”

    Heh. There is a “militantblack” I know from another blog and he was rather civil. I hope it’s not the same guy.

  26. fred Says:

    restructure writes, fred, you are trolling even in this comment thread when you write, “Well, all I can say is that I can often tell race, gender, etc from the content of one’s comments as easily as I can tell it from the sound of one’s voice on the phone.”

    Not at all. I just googled “can you tell someone’s race voice” and most people think they can. I also do a good job from comments because I grew up in a majority black environment and I’ve talked to a lot of blacks on the internet. One gets a feel for that sort of thing. It’s not 100% but it’s pretty good. And as I’ve already pointed out — I was right 3 for 3 wasn’t I?

    africanblackmilitant has been banned, though, for being a liar and a troll.

    In your opinion, he was a liar and a troll. In my opinion, he actually was an “africanblackmilitant”. But that’s beside the point because I didn’t reference ABM for making inappropriate comments. I referenced comment #6163 which was Abe Jackson (and AfroCan) saying “Fuck Fred”. Were they banned? No.

    Also, fred appears uninterested in actually debating the topic and resorts to sophistry. He doesn’t address my points, and just fixates on the fact that I called him racist.

    Sophistry? HA! You call it “sophistry” because I pointed out the flaws in your argument. That’s why you guys hate me and resort to namecalling. Speaking of namecalling, maybe if you stopped namecalling then I wouldn’t “fixate” on it.

    and he also once claimed that he was “immune to subliminal messages”. There really isn’t a point in pointing out the error of someone’s thoughts if they are completely delusional and out of touch with reality.

    One of the differences between you and me is that I tend not to make false assumptions. Did it ever occur to you to ask why I’m “immune to subliminal messages”??? Not that I would tell you. You just automatically assumed I was “delusional and out of touch with reality”. But there actually is a small subset of the population who are immune to such things. For example, schizophrenics and alcoholics are immune to the “hollow mask” illusion. The first, because their brains are wired differently and the second because the alcohol has damaged that portion of the brain. I’m neither schizophrenic nor an alcoholic. Those were just examples.

    http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/04/schizoillusion/
    ————————————-

    Interestingly enough, interspersed between ASQV’s homo-erotic fantasies of “penetrating” me and comical psycho-analysis he did make one correct allusion — provided one takes it out of context.

    Restructure, I wish we could dissect fred’s brain so we could locate the specific gene that creates people like him.

    Listen up, Hollywood, they have dissected brains of people with my traits. Some very famous ones in fact. Now, where’s my scalpel because I’d dearly love to learn what makes you the way you are as well.

  27. Restructure! Says:

    (Privilege Denying Dude) I can tell if someone on the internet is black / because I grew up in a black area

    (Privilege Denying Dude) People on the internet say they can tell someone's race from their voice / therefore I have this ability

    (Trollface) Some people can't see an optical illusion / so I may be immune to subliminal messages

  28. Anti-Status Quo Voice Says:

    Look fred,

    Stop wasting our time here…

    For over two years, Restructure has exercised immense tolerance and diplomacy with you. She has given you warning after warning.

    She is even exercising great democracy here in putting this issue to a vote…

    When I started on this blog in Sept, I was in all seriousness in having intelligent debate about the issues represented. I deeply regret that I sometimes stooped to your level in sarcastic rebuttals that you’re now invoking to “plead” your case.

    All you have done is whimper in almost self-pity in trying to “justify” your White supremacist hate.

    Maybe know can perhaps get the POC “experience” of being “fired”, excluded from participation, not having your voice heard, being held in contempt!

    Can’t you get it, that nobody wants you here—go shxt some place else!

  29. destructure Says:

    [Comment has been deleted due to (racist-)homophobic name-calling and homophobic language.]

  30. Anti-Status Quo Voice Says:

    destructure Says:
    December 31, 2010 at 12:09 am

    She couldn’t ban me because I never gave her a reason.

    ……………..

    You’ve given Restructure yet another one, fred..

    Glad you got this off your White supremacist chest..

    Hope you are exhausted your venom!

    ta-ta

    .

  31. Jayn Says:

    So, we can believe fred is mentally ill, brain damaged, or stick with the old assumption that he has a massive superiority complex. All three have plenty of corroborating evidence.

  32. destructure Says:

    Well, Jayn, I’m a little sensitive about my condition. I was born with a freakishly large IQ. So you should probably stick with the assumption that I have a massive superiority complex. Yes, my arrogance is a character flaw. But it’s one I’m willing to live with. Now, go sit in the corner and flap your hands or something. :)

  33. Restructure! Says:

    (Trollface) People are ignoring my comments / I stumped them with my brilliant logic

  34. Restructure! Says:

    The comment policy has been updated to ban people who use racist or homophobic name-calling. Sadly, this has happened several times on this blog.

    If fred/destructure gets banned early, then I will close the poll before Sunday.

  35. destructure Says:

    How about you close the poll right now and stick it up your ass?

  36. Summer Says:

    I say ban Fred. We’re spending too much time and energy combating him as an individual instead of focusing on the larger picture of anti-racism work.

  37. SUCKY SUCKY FIVE DORRA Says:

    Please, you only wish to ban Fred because he regularly outdebates all the clowns that congregate on your blog with almost laughable ease. It IS the ONLY reason i read this blog.

  38. Katie (first one) Says:

    Thanks, Restructure. Well played.

  39. The Nerd Says:

    Fred: “Yes. I do have sexist double standards. For example, I think the man should to do the penetrating. Though apparently that’s not the case in your relationship. :)”

    Gaaa! Transphobia! TRANSPHOBIA!

    Good riddance.

  40. Katie #2 Says:

    yay!

  41. katie Says:

    transphobia?

  42. numol Says:

    @katie: fred’s comment was transphobic because he was making fun of women who have penises.

    @Jayn: Let’s just call fred an asshole instead of “mentally ill” or “brain damaged”. I’m really not okay with the idea of insults that cause collateral damage (i.e. mocking people’s medical conditions).

    @fred/destructure/whatever: Clearly, you have less of a life than I do — go do something useful instead of spewing bigoted crap on the Internet all day. Really, you are not interesting, nor are you a unique and beautiful snowflake like you seem to think you are, so get out.

  43. katie Says:

    Numol: “fred’s comment was transphobic because he was making fun of women who have penises.”

    Thanks for the explanation. I forgot all about the “women who have penises”.

  44. numol Says:

    Actually fred’s comment was probably intersex-bashing, too (it falls in line with those bigoted tropes also).

    Glad to see he’s (hopefully) finally out of here. Probably gone back to his regular weekend hobby of picking Rush Limbaugh’s toenails.

  45. numol Says:

    …adding this late, but fred’s comments were probably also binarist.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: