Thursday, 18 October 2007

Internet Trolls : Provocative Communications - How far should moderators go to defend your brand?

Brand Killer Robots reveal::
Last week we put a post up on the BBC 606 website that went something like this. If Alonso wins Formula 1 and it is clear that the whole thing was rigged, then we will never, ever watch F1 again.
It came straight from the heart. We felt that the FIA were fiddling around in issues that had absolutely nothing to do with them and were if anything designed to discredit Mclaren even further and threatened to tarnish the sport entirely, rather than reinforce confidence and trust.

So when we got the response back from BBC moderators that our post was rejected on grounds of criteria set by the BBC, it made us feel like we were a bunch of Internet Trolls. Here is the definition.

As defined by Wiki 15.10.07
An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an on-line community such as an on-line discussion forum with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.

It is true, we are anything other than non-controversial. Always have been, always will be - A BIT. But come on guys! What kind of moderation is this? Especially as our post was a response to a seemingly provocative debate, along side debates such as "Mosley, are you a Hypocrite?".

But as with many message board services, we don't have a right of reply to the moderator, we just have to shut up or change our post to something that is acceptable.
Suffice to say, we erased our presence from all of the message boards, including 606 and then went a little crazy later on and dumped our entire BBC membership in the trashcan.

Advice being to monitor member posts over a period of time in order to determine if they have are behaving as trolls, rather than determining intent on the basis of one fairly innocuous post.

No comments: