Fake forum commenters 'eroding' trust in the web - BBC

[sixmile]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15869683

'Trust in information on the web is being damaged by the huge numbers of people paid by companies to post comments online, say researchers. Fake posters can "poison" debate and make people unsure about who they can trust, the study suggests. Some firms have created tens of thousands of fake accounts to flood chat forums and skew debate.'

snip

'However, fakes can be spotted by analysing their patterns of activity and the words they use, say the researchers. Fakes are more likely to start new comment threads, make inane comments rather than add to a debate, and repeat former comments with minor changes, the study suggests. The researchers say they are refining software tools to help website administrators tackle the "painful" problem.'

more at link

[TheWraith]

1. Describing them as "people" is rather misleading.

In actuality, this is mostly done by software, not by people actually getting on the computer and typing.

[sixmile]

3. Ever debated a Troll?

That is not software. It is however, programming.

[TheWraith]

12. Yeah, but obfuscating stupidity is different from paid astroturf. ;) nt

[AverageJoe90]

179. I've seen a lot of really nasty ones on YouTube who sound like they could be Establishment shills...

Many of the white supremacists in particular, especially the 'Aryan Nations' and 'Christian' 'Identity' types, etc.

[annabanana]

2. I'm not worried. They'll try to automate it so as not to have to pay people

and it'll all be babblefish.

[woo me with science]

4. Commercials should be clearly labeled as such. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

127. All your comment

are belong to us.

[phasma ex machina]

5. How many fake forum commenting agents provocateurs does the BBC and other powers-that-be employ

to try to marginalize critics of the conventional wisdom espoused by the BBC and other powers-that-be?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

63. As many red herrings as grow in the wood.

The BBC has reasonably high standards, in general.

[DCBob]

6. I think the vast majority are GOP paid operatives.

Its so obvious sometimes with their tone and choice of words, cut and paste techniques. I think much of stuff is just sent to them and they post it in as many places as possible. I assume they get paid based on the number of posts.

[bvar22]

9. If I managed a Marketing/PR firm For Corporate/Wall Street America,

I would spend our money and focus our efforts on co-opting the Democratic Party
by having my teams focus on Democratic sites and actively supporting "Centrist" Pro-Business policies,
and marginalizing Pro-Working Class opposition with coordinated Tag-Team attacks.

There would much more Bang for the Buck there.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Robb]

11. If I were the GOP, and controlled the media,

...I'd give as much ink and airtime as I could to the most divisive commentators on the left I could find. And I'd make sure there were plenty of counter-opinions from the left, too. Get 'em squabbling but good.

Then I'd throw some good red meat stories to the right, things they could all agree on.

Yep. That's bang for your buck.

Neither a complicated plan, nor a new one.

[bvar22]

13. Help me out here.

Please post examples of comments and links to Media Sources that "give as much ink and airtime as I could to the most divisive commentators on the left I could find."

I have to search the Alternative Media to find any commentators from The Left.
Please tell me where these Mainstream sources are so that I can find them and support them.
Thanks.



Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Robb]

14. How do you define "Alternative Media," exactly?

:D

[KoKo]

28. Robb...Come On...Alternative Media is now many sites banned on DU...

You and I both know that... And for a website that is "Democratic Underground" ...is surprising.

[Mimosa]

61. How do we learn which sites are banned afrom mentioning (?) on D.U.?

People link to Free republic all the time. That board is a huge BORE.

So how would one know which sites are verboten? I've never seen a list. PM me if there are some which can't be mentioned. I can't believe the rules at D.U. would forbid mentioning names. Linking to racist sites is something I wouldn't do.

[KoKo]

167. It's for "Some to Know" and "You and Me" not to know....???

That's the only thing I've been able to make out in the recent years here on "DU?"

[Quantess]

187. I know of 2 ultra-right-wing sites that are forbidden to mention here.

One of them was named after DU, (except the first word starts with a C) and is basically a DU stalker site. Actually both sites are obsessed with DU. They are total losers who spend their time lurking obsessively at DU, then they post their stalkerish gossip there. The other one has 2 words that start with C. You'll need a shower afterwards.

That's all I know.

[Mimosa]

199. Thanks, I found them.

Quantess, thanks for the clues. I found them. I perused for a while.

I can easily understand why mentioning either site and their boards would be discouraged here on D.U.. Both sites (which may be run by the same person) are leeching off Democratic Underground topics and postings. They appear to be TINY, nearly dead boards. The handful of members at both sites appear to be the typical tea party dullards. All the few dullards do is post boring, predictable comments about topics posted here. *yawn*

If members of Democratic Underground mentioned them or linked to either, they'd get some hits and maybe some ad revenue, since both boards have ads. IMO, it's a good call not to feed the trolls. It seems a hobby of the 'conservative' dullards is to pretend to be liberals and post on D.U.. *big yawn*

[caseymoz]

84. Evasion. You know he's right. nt

[saras]

165. Alternative media is not paid for by advertising or corporations. What's so hard about that?

The only problems is that organizations that sell out have to let go of the term "alternative" and they don't want to.

[Robb]

201. There is no such beast.

I can see where you're trying to take it -- Pacifica, maybe, or Democracy Now! -- but the truth is, they're all beholden to corporate interests.

When they say, "All our funding is from listeners and foundations," that should make you take breath. Consider who sits on the boards of the foundations that fund these "independent" projects.

I am fond of quoting Slavoj Zizek on this, and I will do it again: "The ultimate show of power on the part of the ruling ideology is to allow what appears to be powerful criticism."

[phasma ex machina]

16. "I have to search the Alternative Media to find any commentators from The Left."

+1 Amen! Ergo my earlier suspicion of the BBC and other powers-that-be trying ever-so-subtly to diss Alternative Media.

[muriel_volestrangler]

27. Wait - you were serious, then ?

:wow:

How do you see the BBC, and its budget?

[Laelth]

80. Oh, me too. Please.

I want to know exactly who these "divisive" alternative media commentators from the left are. Personally, I haven't found them.

-Laelth

[SidDithers]

15. +1...nt

Sid

[CreekDog]

37. we know how you feel about many of us

you posted that once in a rather epic thread.

[JDPriestly]

77. I should think a person paid to post by the GOP

would post very short posts -- probably paid by the post -- with very little information in them.

I see a lot of posts that sort of make a discouraging comment to another post but don't really give any grounds, don't explain the reasoning of the person making the derogatory post.

For example, I often post about how discouraged I am with Obama -- say on his civil rights record with regard to denying a defendant the right to a jury trial.

I go into detail and explain my position. Invariably, someone who could easily be a paid DLCer comes on and challenges my position without explaining why, without justifying their own point of view.

A person who is paid to post will a) post boiler-plate material copied from somewhere or b) post a short statement that challenges without explaining why.

You see it a lot. The writing is either not very original or very short. The paid commentators are trying to make as many short, unsubstantiated posts as possible in the least time.

Also, one of them always posts in a certain style, sometimes using color in a way that none of the rest of us do. He frequently posts a boiler-plate list of Obama's achievements -- completely irrelevant to the issues that I have raised and to which he pretends to be responding.

So you can't tell who is what by their point of view. Rather you can tell by how much original work and thought they put into their posts.

Oh, and that is another thing, the phony posts rarely contain an original idea.

[patrice]

88. 1+++

[ZenaD]

100. So why are so many "centrist" commenters such condescending assholes?

I mean other than them being mostly that way in real life.

[sabrina 1]

105. They already do that. The only 'democrats' I ever see on the MSM

are the infiltrators from the Third Way, basically insulting the real base of the party. So they are apparently ahead of you.

What I would like to see are more real Democrats on the MSM, representing the real values of the Party, not those who support forever war and refuse to hold war criminals accountable, or Economic Criminals. That kind of Dem is rarely seen on our media. Although recently you do get to see them on other cable networks, such as Current now and RT.

The MSM does not allow any views that are considered by them to be 'left' to have any platform on their Corporate controlled media.

[Enthusiast]

125. Your posts consistently

go to the heart of the matter, plowing through the bullshit. And they are greatly appreciated.

Yes, the MSM will tell us what the left thinks, thank you very much. Even if it is a right wing caricature of what the left thinks on an issue. Damn pathetic in what passes for a free and democratic nation. Only the purest propaganda is allowed. Yet somehow we have a "liberal media".

[No Elephants]

184. We have two kinds of media, Republican and establishment (whomever the establishment

happens to be at the moment), but it's mostly Republican.

That is my personal observation.

Democracy Now! is a rare exception and, IMO, deserving of whatever anyone on the Left can donate.

[Rex]

140. 'divisive commentators on the left '

Like who? Can you give me one example (besides Malloy).

[ZenaD]

161. I'd like them to identify one with a following in numbers that would have any impact on an election

This is something I ask wingnuts all the time. Who is the left wing equivalent of Rush or Beck? The responses are comical. I've had several say Oprah (!) and one actually said Ward Churchill. :rofl:

Now we have Third Wayers and extreme Obama loyalists pushing a similar false equivalence. I swear you'd think Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher had demonic control over millions of Democratic voters the way they talk.

[Rex]

163. It was rhetorical.

I don't expect anyone to be able to give me anything back.

[Lucky Luciano]

43. Isn't that what the DLC was designed to do? nt

[No Elephants]

185. No. It was to neuter the Democratic Party.

[JNelson6563]

54. I strongly disagree.

If I worked for a marketing firm from Wall St. I would have people posting as lefties who are "discouraged" with the Dems. Just keep bitching, all anti-Dem, all the time. Offer no alternative actions, just anti-Dem. This would result in people just falling away, having been convinced their ations and votes will come to nothing.

There is no better way to empower one team than to completely demoralize the rival.

I daresay, judging by certain posting patterns here at DU (as well as elsewhere around the net--so often helpfully brought to DU), I wager such Wall St. firms tend to agree with my strategy than yours.

Work to co-opt the Dems and make it a more centrist party still makes it possible that the party in power won't be as helpful as they'd like. No, the safer and likely more profitable way to go would be to do anything possible to discourage Dems from voting and get/keep wingers in power.

Julie

[GoCubsGo]

67. Yep, "divide and conquer"

And, anyone who doesn't think they aren't already doing just that here, at TPM, Kos, and everywhere else, might be interested in the bridge in Brooklyn that I have for sale.

[hulka38]

83. But for your theory to work

you'd have to believe that loyal, lifelong, informed Dems (regular people who knew the Iraq War was a sham and Wall St. was a dangerous house of cards well before anyone else including the media, centrist Dems and cons acknowledged it) would have to be fooled by unsophisticated trolls on a discussion board.

What about people like Bill Moyers and other FDR Democrats? Is Moyers "bitching" because he's been duped by internet discussion trolls? Is that plausible in your mind?

What about the possibility that Democratic Party leadership is beholden to the people who pay them and they suck because of it and that it's really easy to see for people who know what's going on? Can you entertain that thought?

[JNelson6563]

97. "Lifelong Dems"

Ah yes, that routine. I believe it is a favorite strategy of wingers calling c-span, they love to open with I've been a lifelong democrat all my life but...."

And take a look through the archives, you will see many "lifelong Dems" have been bitching constantly about the Dems, ignoring any achievements and just, in general, maintaining a constant negativity.

Back when DU first started I had never been involved in politics before. Some real life activists that used to post here inspired me to get involved in a big way. When I was working with the Kerry campaign team for a visit here I spoke in similar tones to the talk at DU. Didn't take me long to figure out that this was not how the real grown ups in the big campaigns talked. Having read DU so much I apparently took on the somewhat toxic tone this place seems to bring out in people.

As to money and being bought and all that, really? Are we back to "there's not a dime's worth of difference...?" Bill Moyers? Yeah, I have seen his comments, two things come to mind....is the poison money has become in our politics a revelation to him? And is he also going the way of Ralph Nader with that whole dime's-worth-of-difference bullshit?

What do ou suggest in the meantime? Refuse to raise money or take donations from organizations that can donate big, just let the R's win the money race by a long shot and slaughter us with negative ads and swift-boat-liar type campaigns? Oh, wait, that would be spineless.....So, Dems can join the money race to stay competitive and be "as bad as the Republicans" or they can not play along and run ineffective campaigns that get drowned out by the well funded right win noise machine and be "spineless wimps". Talk about a no-win situation....

In the end I have no problem with criticism but, if you really want to be helpful with it, it's usually accompanied by things like suggestions on how to improve the situation, reports on actions taken in the real world (and hopefully convince more to leave the keyboard and get out there!), positive things like that.

To consistently go to a forum and do NOTHING BUT COMPLAIN accomplishes nothing except to spread negativity.

I found your remarks interesting, do you see yourself anywhere in any of this?

Julie

[ZenaD]

109. "real grown ups in the big campaigns" huh?

Yeah, the big stars in politics have their groupies too. :rofl:

[bvar22]

147. Ther gaping hole in your rebuttal is that...

...many of those "Lifelong Dems" you attempt to marginalize and discredit
have 10 year histories at DU,
have been loyal DEMOCRATS for over 40 years,
and have consistently opposed BAD POLICY whether it was the Republicans or the Democrats who were responsible for it.

Many of these ""Lifelong Dems" have a long posting history at DU decrying the corrupting influence of Corporate Money in the Democratic Party, and documenting the betrayal of the FDR/LBJ Democratic Values that have been trash canned by the "New Democrat Centrist Party".

Many of these "Lifelong Dems" have lived long enough,
and worked inside the Democratic Party long enough to KNOW the difference between the Party of FDR,
and what passes as the Democratic Party today.

You disclosed that you had no involvement with politics before 2000,
yet you attack those who have been involved for over 40 years.
Is it because you are a noob at politics
that you can't see the complete abandonment of the New Deal of FDR and The Great Society of LBJ ?
It IS glaringly apparent to those of us who were involved BEFORE the 1990s and the era of "Centrism" brought to us by the DLC.

Many of these "Lifelong Dems" want only to see the Party return to those traditional Working Class Democratic Party Values that made our Party GREAT.

These "Lifelong Dems" have been consistent.
It is NOT about a person, it IS about The Policy.
Its ALL in the archives.



"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone

photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[sabrina 1]

154. Excellent post, thank you.

The sad thing is about your post, it is the REAL, longtime Democrats that these 'trolls' would like to rid the party of.

Note how many times if someone like Bill Moyers eg, says something critical of the current crop of Third Wayers, he is instantly thrown utb. No REAL Democrat would ever do that to someone like Moyers, even if they disagreed with him. It's always revealing to see though.

[ZenaD]

158. Paul Krugman, who was their BFF during the health care debate is now UTB

He dared to criticize Third Way austerity magic.

[No Elephants]

186. Whaddaya tryin' to do? Kill a meme?

Wonderful effort, good cause, but, futile, I fear.

The concept that solid Democrats could find things about Obama and/or the DLCers, New Dems, Third Wayers, No Labelers, etc. to criticize is too difficult to digest.

[PassingFair]

178. Yeah, those "real grown-ups" here in Michigan sure promoted our last candidate. NOT.

Michigan Democratic politics are disgraceful.

Andy Dillon as Speaker? Shameful.

Tanking our own primary? Horrifying.

Refusing to materially support Virg Bernero? Disgusting.

[GoCubsGo]

99. Just because they are informed doesn't me they're immune to discouragement.

I'm sure you know all about memes. Even the most informed person is vulnerable when they hear incessant gloom and doom. You hear that crap non-stop, especially when things are not going as you would like, and some start believing it. That's how memes work.

[ZenaD]

102. + a brazillion

[patrice]

129. Re "beholden", yeah, and We the People had absolutely nothing to do with the Dem's(or anyone-else's)

failures to read our minds.

Innocent us. We all just showed up yesterday to discover the little puppy we had put into the hen-house grown fat on Blood for Oil amongst other things we wanted and then didn't.

Anyone who has been around political parties much KNOWS that they are social organizations at the grassroots level, AMERICANS content to NOT ask the hard questions or do any hard work, like canvassing, a fact that changed for Republicans with their use of CHURCHES, and a fact that the Democrats have only just now started to admit, perhaps tooooooooooo late.

Our politics are the result of who/what we are. Authoritarians capitulate to authority, especially money in our culture.

We did a significant part of what has happened to ourselves; no party label of anykind/color would have changed that.

[Enthusiast]

131. This is a damn good post.

I was going to quote parts of your post. But to get all the good parts I found I would need to quote the entire thing. I'll just narrow it down to this: "they suck because of it"

[patrice]

89. "...Work(ing) to co-opt..." can also result in being co-opted, another reason that it is avoided. It

requires acute honest clarity that strengthens their own identification with their own truest values, which many either don't possess or they're working on a strategic feint in service of their own advantage in co-opting.

[ZenaD]

106. Wow, if only the WH, DNC, DSCC, DCCC etc

Had the awesome power to affect election outcomes as do disgruntled lefties on obscure political websites!

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ZenaD]

116. I'm not a believer in supernatural phenomena

And if you're accusing me of being a sock it's not intentional. I posted under a different name here back in 2004-2005 and forgot my user name and password. And I discontinued the email account I used to register so I figured it was just easier to start a new account. Really, that's all there is to it. I'm not part of the grand insidious disgruntled leftie internet conspiracy to undermine your wonderful centrist Dem grown up heroes.

[sabrina 1]

112. So, can you give us some examples of these 'patterns' you see

here from 'fake lefties' paid to undermine the party?

I have seen far more of the DLC types who don't even hide their agenda to turn the party to the right. Defending every rightwing policy their candidates support. Over several years, THOSE are the people who have driven people away from the party. Rahm Emanuel eg, probably did more harm to the Dem Party than all the 'paid posters' they could hire.

You have a poor opinion of Democrats imo. Most democrats are smart enough to know when the party is being undermined. There is no reason to fear that, all you have to do is stick to the Party Platform and when they refuse to defend it, you know who they are.

[ZenaD]

117. Thank you. This is classic projection.

The Third Way corporate wing of the Dems floods the net with propaganda and accuses liberals of doing the same thing.

[Enthusiast]

139. Woo hooo!

"Most democrats are smart enough to know when the party is being undermined."

My party has been undermined. Absolutely undermined. We are very close to becoming the party of Wall Street. Most rank and file Democrats have yet to acknowledge this. This is not a happy development. Of course the Republican Party is already the Party of Wall Street.

[No Elephants]

191. "Party of Wall Street"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRkCvubUGCM

(If you watch, I recommend turning off the annoying sound. There's no audio narrative.)

See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Labels

[No Elephants]

190. Offering certain alternatives violates DU rules.

[Mimosa]

57. That appears to be the M.O., BVar. n/t

[Laelth]

78. bvar22, it appears your strategy has been successfully employed.

On DU and elsewhere.

-Laelth

[Zorra]

79. Yeah. Relentlessly promote core GOP ideology under the "big tent" meme.

Promote a third way within the Democratic party, a way that is opposite, primarily in economic philosophy, to traditional Democratic ideology.

Divide the party between supporters of the 1%, ownership, and the 99%, labor.

Neutralize the Democratic party, make it ineffective in overturning GOP policy, maintaining traditional Dem policy, and passing new traditional Dem big business regulating legislation.

Promote global free trade, overturn legislation like the Glass-Steagall Act.

Establish a division within the party.

Posters of this persuasion might not have been overjoyed at the Koch Bros 1% smackdown and gains by labor and traditional Dems made in the Nov 8, 2011 elections, would not be thrilled about overturning Citizens United, would not be in favor of a constitutional amendment taking the money out of campaigns and government, and would not be big fans of hard core traditional Dems like Elizabeth Warren, etc.

I would imagine that, since they promote the interests of the 1% with their unlimited wealth, that there are many of them posting to promote their agenda on the internet.

Ya know, I think you may have something there, bvar.
;)

[Blue_In_AK]

91. I agree with you, Bvar22. n/t

[sabrina 1]

103. That's what I would do also. Infiltrate the party.

Maybe we should infiltrate the Republican Party now, as they have done to the Democratic Party. We are always on the defensive and 'all is fair in love and war'.

That party is badly in need of infiltration. And of course, we can also back real Progressives to start re-infiltrating the Dem Party.

[ZenaD]

164. I really wish the DLC crowd would go back to the GOP where they belong

They can take it back from the fundies.

[Union Scribe]

104. Looks like you smoked a few out

of their hidey holes ;)

[No Elephants]

189. Interesting video

I find the sound annoying, but you lose nothing watching it with the sound off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRkCvubUGCM

[SpiralHawk]

35. + 1,000

[CreekDog]

40. Remember the clumsy anti-Tibet posts from new, low count posters right before the 2008 Olympics?

The 2008 Beijing Olympics.

Many here, I think rightly, suspected the batch of apparently single-agenda posters at that time.

[Pacifist Patriot]

52. It's painfully obvious this is true in responses to news articles posted at RoadRunner.

[Rex]

142. I agree.

I wish there was some mechanism to catch them and then post their master's phone number!

[lutefisk]

7. Remember all the "fake commentators" on DU during the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster?

While some of them were tombstoned fairly quickly, they did suck more than a few into their web of disinformation...

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. yup

[sixmile]

10. Watch the Iran commenters across the interwebs

So much dis-information, so little time. Newspapers, too.

[snagglepuss]

24. They stand out like a sore thumb as do Chinese commenters.

[AverageJoe90]

180. I'd be especially wary of those fervently defending the government and/or bashing Israel....

[bvar22]

18. You meant THESE posts?

Everybody CALM DOWN!!!
They're just venting a little steam.
I KNOW "Science".
Nuclear Energy is PERFECTLY SAFE!!!
These plants are engineered to withstand natural Disasters and Terrorists Attacks.
There is nothing to worry about.
Did I mention that I know "Science" and YOU don't,
so stop worrying your pretty little heads.

THOSE posts?
Yeah, I remember them.
You can see them today too.
Just post something critical of Monsanto, GM foods, or High Fructose Corn Syrup.



Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[MichaelMcGuire]

20. LOL You've summed them up in a nutshell

//Everybody CALM DOWN!!!
They're just venting a little steam.
I KNOW "Science".
Nuclear Energy is PERFECTLY SAFE!!!
These plants are engineered to withstand natural Disasters and Terrorists Attacks.
There is nothing to worry about.
Did I mention that I know "Science" and YOU don't,
so stop worrying your pretty little heads.
//

[GeorgeGist]

55. 'However, fakes can be spotted by analysing their patterns of activity and the words they use ...

... and repeat former comments with minor changes,...'

[Sal Minella]

22. And I'm wondering about the deadly exploding batteries in the

Chevy Volt -- I'm sure there's no Big Oil money involved in propagating these stories, now that electric cars are becoming more and more desirable.

[Lorien]

69. Or big phama. A few lurk regularly in the health forum

they'll slap down any non-pharma solution to a health issue in a nanosecond, and some have thousands of posts.

[ZenaD]

120. I've got some facebook friends who are pro-nuke zealots

And they usually turn out to be working for the industry in some capacity. Odd, that.

[Rex]

143. THAT'S THE ONES!

Funny how you don't see the names around here like you did during the beginning of the crisis. We were told to STFU by robots! :eyes:

[taught_me_patience]

17. They've swooped in destroyed Huffington Post... n/t

[KoKo]

26. Have you been over to "TPM's site recently?

:-(

[Odin2005]

32. HuffPo destroyed itself with fluff and woo.

[cui bono]

38. By selling out to AOL and not paying their writers. That was BS and made

me stop going there.

[GoCubsGo]

66. True, but the paid trolls had already crapped the place up.

The AOL sell-out just made it official. Every last political thread was troll-infested even before the fluff and woo. Hell, they even find a way to crap up the fluff and woo with their political bullshit.

[Odin2005]

92. Point taken!

[No Elephants]

188. +1

[MichaelMcGuire]

19. The bbc pretty much shuts off comment from their site anyway

[kestrel91316]

21. The 1% have LOTS of money to pay for this sort of thing, and I guarantee

you they do. They obviously have a lot of hirelings right here.

[fascisthunter]

23. .

[Zorra]

33. Yep. And their main objective is to stop OWS. There are no other threats

to them. None. OWS is it.

They desperately don't want Citizens United overturned, or a constitutional amendment passed that takes all the money and lobbying out of politics.

They'd lose control of the government.

They control the entire GOP, and the DLC/Third Way party as well.

[Enthusiast]

145. I agree with you.

There is no threat to their supremacy besides OWS. As I have said, we need to be in the streets in the millions because that is what it will take. I never thought it would happen but this nation has been completely taken over.

[bvar22]

151. "They have no message."

"They need a leader."

"They really look silly."

"Dirty Hippies."

"It just looks disorganized."

"Yeah, but WHAT do they want?"

"They need to work within the system."

"They aren't providing concrete solutions."

"There is absolutely NO PROOF that the raids were coordinated."






You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[KoKo]

25. Oh these "Bots" are all over the web on the most respectable of sites which one would

think should be able to filter them out or at least get a Mod Volunteer. But, they are there and there for a purpose.

It's sad that people still "engage with them." It's taking "Trolldom" to new heights when you see these posts and they all sound the same with only a word or two difference coming up whenever something that isn't what the MSM wants us to hear and believe...comes up.

It's getting worse and worse as the technology gets better and better. It's EVERYWHERE...and even here.

[eShirl]

29. Gee, that doesn't sound like anyone here.

[Fumesucker]

30. I think this thread if just fucking hilarious..

Both sides think the other side are bots.

Talk about your Dueling Turing Tests..

[Odin2005]

31. We have a bunch of them here bashing Progressives.

[ellisonz]

36. Oh please...

:eyes:

[DainBramaged]

41. Really? Really.....

deflect and deny.......

[ellisonz]

44. Somebody get this guy a helmet...

:tinfoilhat:

[DainBramaged]

45. Go back to sleep...............

:puke:

[JanMichael]

50. I can't remember what the topic was now

but, I just sat there putting some on ignore....I mean, like a dozen in one day. For about a week, I would click on a thread and see "ignore" over and over...

Now? back to normal...which tells me they were either tombstoned, or just added more user names, and I haven't clicked on anything controversial enough.

I did notice some "odd" responses to the HFCS thread...which does not surprise me, given the context of this OP.

[Mimosa]

58. HFCS is big money, a major industry.

They can't afford for consumers to start boycotting the product.

They're also lobbying FDA to let them change the name of high fructose corn syrup to the more innocuous sounding 'corn sugar'. I bet they'll succeed.

[russspeakeasy]

73. I'll bet they succeed too.. and if by some miracle they don't win

today, they will be back until they do win. If they could make money selling rat milk, they would and call it "range free".

[Enthusiast]

150. It gets discouraging when they succeed at everything.

Nothing beats cubic inches, er dollars. They're going to get their fucking pipeline too, I don't care who wins the election. This is a bet I can win.

Free range rat milk. Soylent green, whatever. This is going to get ugly.

[Enthusiast]

146. There isn't?

Why the eye roll?

[cui bono]

39. +1

And supporting a right of center "leader" while doing so, forgetting that this site is supposed to be about the Democratic Party's platform.

[muriel_volestrangler]

46. Yes, the Democratic party. Do you really think that pro-Obama posters are out of line

with the Democratic party platform? If you do, then please point me to something in the platform that Obama is working against.

Obama is solidly in the mainstream of the Democratic party.

[panzerfaust]

49. Obama is solidly in the mainstream of the Democratic party - Sadly, This may be true

I liked the Democratic party much better when it supported: Unions, Freedom of Speech and Conscience, Diversity, Public Education (much as I disliked my public education), Fair Trade, Fair Wage, environmental preservation, Civil Rights for All, freedom of the press, freedom from government repression, public transportation, universal health-care ...

[Mimosa]

59. Support of those issues would mean the democratic party offers a genuine alternative. n/t

[No Elephants]

192. "A genuine alternative" is undesirable to financial markets; and the golden rule prevails.

The golden rule: S/he who has the gold makes the rules.

Why financial markets likes them Parties that are as much alike as feasible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRkCvubUGCM



See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Labels

[bvar22]

70. The Democratic Party used to support "rights",

as in these "rights":

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being." FDR, SoU Address, 1944

The New Democrat Centrist Party does NOT see the above as "rights",
but rather as "commodities" to be sold to Americans by the Ownership Class at the highest possible profit.


"And EVERYBODY has a Share", shouted Milo as the American Planes began dropping bombs on their own base,
(Milo "globalized & privatized" the US Air Force in Libya, and the Germans "outsourced" their
bombing of Americans to Milo.) -----Catch22, Joesph Heller



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ZenaD]

124. Free trade and austerity are mainstream Dem positions?

Obama holds plenty of good Dem positions but where he differs from the base is pretty noteworthy.

[Enthusiast]

153. Americans, especially Democratic Party Americans, HATE

those God Damned free trade agreements.

The American people, and especially Democratic Party Americans want the Wall Street criminals investigated and punished for fraud.

The American people, especially Democratic Party Americans want out of Afghanistan NOW.

The American people and the Democratic Party rank and file did not want Obama to extend the Bush tax cuts.

The American people and the Democratic Party voters wanted a public option, or something like it.

[a simple pattern]

60. You missed the memo!

IOKIYHADAYN

(It's OK If You Have A "D" After Your Name)

[patrice]

96. How do you differentiate between "bashing" and horizontal processing? nt

[Odin2005]

108. LOL, WUT?

[patrice]

113. Horizontal, as in Occupation general assemblies, which include occupiers who disagree with one

another, when is that disagreement bashing (here at DU, within an Occupation, or anywhere else for that matter) and when is is horizontal processing?

[bluestate10]

166. Fucking kidding?

The attacks on President Obama by those calling themselves progressives here on DU would make even the most virulent birther proud and happy to read. If you want respect, GIVE respect.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[backscatter712]

42. Go to any article on any mainstream newspaper or news site...

Go to the contents section, and you'll see repeated rants about the "dirty commie hippies" at OWS.

Very repetitive. Definitely paid shills.

[a simple pattern]

62. I noticed that, backscatter712

The language was also very violent, it was obviously meant to have a chilling/intimidating effect..

[Jim Warren]

47. Right here in River City

Note the number of replies to previous posts vs the OP.

[panzerfaust]

51. ??? The significance of this remark escapes me

Does it imply that by replying to another commenter - as though one were participating in an actual discussion - rather than to the OP somehow is a marker for Trolldom?

Or that if the OP does not reply to each comment that the OP is a Troll?

[patrice]

95. DU must be designed wrong.

[panzerfaust]

48. Information provided by random, unknown persons is not to be trusted??

Why. I never thought of that!

[snot]

53. It's esp. obvious on smaller blogs – when there are virtually NO comments on post after post,

and all of a sudden, some politically-oriented post attracts a flood of RW vitriol, it's like wow, those people must be scouring the web for something to excoriate.

[sarcasmo]

56. Don't they mean bought and paid for right wing posters.

[DirkGently]

64. Paid posters should be required to disclose the fact. It's advertising, disguised as speech.

[Lorien]

72. Agreed. Instead one dare not even ask the question

if you do, that post will be deleted.

[Response]

87. That's one of the best ideas that I have heard on the subject.

[DirkGently]

200. I've often wondered why this area isn't regulated. Commerical speech should be transparent.

As should professional partisan political speech. And yet you see ads around for paid posting, but never see anyone say, "Hi, I'm from the Jim Johnson campaign, and I think ..." Or, "Hello, Acme Mining Services, here to let you know that Acme disagrees with this regulation ..."

So companies, and presumably political campaigns, are engaging in paid commercial speech that's pretending to be independent opinion.

It's dishonest, and it's bad faith.

[patrice]

98. Much can be revealed by asking them questions. A poster can refuse to answer just so often before

starting to look at least questionable.

[sabrina 1]

114. That is true. Eg, anyone who will not support SS, Medicare

Medicaid, is not a democrat. Those who make excuses eg, to 'reform' those programs, are suspect.

Those who make excuses for not prosecuting war criminals, and/or Economic criminals, are also suspect since we know that during the Bush administration there was never a single democrat for whom those issues were not of the utmost importance.

So you are correct, it easy to sort out who actually belongs in this Party, and who is attempting to undermine it by making people believe that the party has changed, and now is willing to go along with policies that are the antithesis of what the Party represents.

[patrice]

119. Oh! I'm a Medicare Reform supporter. Have SEEN it up close and personal.

It IS abused. Therefore, it could be more economically efficient and, thus, it would be able to cover everyone, as in Medicare for All. Authentic reform will be necessary for that and I think you'll find yearly "financial review" of payments right up front in HR 676, as it should be.

[ZenaD]

128. So what does the proposed deep cut to providers have to do with eliminating fraud?

I suppose in an indirect way it would reduce the incentives to the crooks but it's also penalizing legit providers, many of whom will drop Medicare patients out of no longer being able to afford to serve them.

[patrice]

132. If you'll look at HR 676, I think you'll find payments in general to be reviewed, this would include

not just providers (and certainly not just direct-care providers who are just one subset of that VERY broad category), but all other kinds of payments: preferred vendors? staffing agencies??? loans:interest-rates? real estate acquisitions? "development" professionals? risk-managers/consultants? . . . ~

[patrice]

133. AND - This isn't just about fraud. Have you ever been around a CMS reporting system?

Like all software, the same data can be managed in a variety of ways, hence, "risk managers".

[ZenaD]

136. No I haven't. Can you explain how cuts to providers will adress that?

[patrice]

137. I think you can read the bill and decide for yourself, can't you? I have to take some food to our

Occupation.

[ZenaD]

141. HR676? Are we getting Medicare for all with this provider cut?

I don't think so but, whatevs. I find your barrage of responses having nothing to do with my query to be useless.

[patrice]

134. Physicians for a National Health Program: HR 676 Expanded & Improved Medicare for All Act

On the front page here:

http://www.pnhp.org/

[patrice]

135. The point being, if cuts are appropriate, they'll be proportional to their in-efficiencies.

I would guess that Direct Care is the most efficient of the payments.

Last time I looked, HR 676 also had annual review of payments, by regional stake-holders.

[ZenaD]

144. Heh

Kinda like how cuts to food stamps are in direct proportion to people's inefficiencies in food selection!

[patrice]

138. Please source "deep". Thanks! nt

[sabrina 1]

152. Well, I didn't address that in my comment. My point was that

anyone who proposes or supports SS 'reform' or medicare or medicaid 'reform' in the form of raising the age limit, eg, or 'adjusting' it or in any way connects these programs to the deficit, is not a Democrat since doing that is lying.

These programs did not cause or have anything to do with the deficit. We know what caused the deficit and the attempt to link the social safety net programs to it is an outright lie. No democrat would tell such lies.

They're really not hard to spot, so I don't get the hysteria over this, we know what the Party Platform is, anyone who opposes it, is not a democrat, simple.

[Enthusiast]

160. No one should be against your Medicare proposals.

I am on medicare and I have seen the abuse up close and personal. Health care services providers often see medicare as a cash cow.

[No Elephants]

193. Doing one's best to eliminate fraud and waste in a program is not "reforming" that program.

It's managing a program the way it should be managed--and should ALWAYS have been managed.

Too often "reform" is code for cutting OASDI, Medicare or social safety nets.

[Enthusiast]

197. Agreed. nt

[No Elephants]

194. Please see Reply 195,

[patrice]

121. BTW, after passage of the ACA, Bernie Sanders said he supported Medicare reform and he

felt that the ACA implemented the possibilities of that.

[sabrina 1]

156. He does not support raising the age as is now being proposed.

Anyone supporting that, is not a Democrat.

He does not support any cuts to SS of any kind, and has consistently pointed out the lie that SS had anything to do with the deficit.

Anyone telling that lie, or subtly attempting to tie SS to the deficit, is not a Democrat.

It's not hard to sort this out, so I don't get the panic over 'infiltrators'. They reveal themselves very plainly as either Third Wayers who are NOT democrats, or rightwingers. Hard to tell the difference most of the time.

[Enthusiast]

157. Plus one!

That is a great suggestion.

[BiggJawn]

65. I call them on it when I run into them on my local paper's board.

They'll regurgitate some pile of astroturf with an extreme RW flavour and I'll ask them if they feel the littlest bit of shame accepting money from the Cato Institute for such a poor quality of writing.

"I'm going to email the American Enterprise Institute and tell them you don't deserve to get paid for that poor excuse of a post."

Drives them into a fury.

[GoCubsGo]

68. I'm going to have to remember that one.

Every once in a while, I get sucked back into Huffy Poo (emphasis on the "Poo"), and that line would come in real handy.

[Name removed]

101. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ZenaD]

130. The editorials in the papers around here are nothing but regurgitated press releases.

[DainBramaged]

71. And the fakers here to direct what they don't like to other forums to keep attention off

and it happens EVERY hour here.

[Lorien]

74. One way to identify them; they generally post about a single issue, and never

do they post any personal details about themselves.

[Zorra]

94. Here's some great info from an earlier post on a different thread,

thanks to DU members darth marth and BeHereNow for this:

"COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum"

'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
snip---
'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered.

'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.

GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes."

more
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x281170

[cui bono]

159. Wow. Fascinating. Thanks for that, hadn't seen it the first time around.

[SidDithers]

169. There's a reason that earlier thread is in the Woo-Woo Dungeon...nt

Sid

[Zorra]

172. No, the thread I'm speaking of was actually posted today, a bit after this one.

It got locked, but not because of woo.

[SidDithers]

174. Just following the link you provided in your post...

that went straight to BHN's thread from Feb 2010 in the Sept 11 forum.

If you meant a different thread, why didn't you link to it?

Sid

[Mimosa]

148. LOL, Lorien. You nailed it.

The 'pros' appear to have no personalities. A couple do have some range, meaning they approach defending their candidate using more than a single approach.

Lorien Upthread, when you posted about the trolls in the health forum, you nailed it again. I haven't often posted in the health forum. The few times I had I was surprised that there was at least one member declaring that vitamins and other supplements were useless and/or needed to be controlled by the FDA or dispensed by prescription!

[Quartermass]

75. The word troll is arguably one of the most overused words on the itnernet.

And I can't tell you how many times I've seen people being called a troll just for having a different opinion or stating it in an unfortunate way, without intending to be inflammatory in any way shape or form.

So I always take articles like these with a grain of salt.

But there are real trolls on the internet.

But for the most part, it's just more whining that some people have different opinions than everybody else.

And that's why I say tolerance is a sham.

[MilesColtrane]

81. Somebody paid you to say that, didn't they?

:evilgrin:

[jimlup]

76. We need a troll sub-species for these people. Anyone have a good name?

In a moments reflection I come up with pseudo-troll and counterfeit-person and neo-troll. Any other good ideas for the name of this sub-species of troll?

[AverageJoe90]

181. Here's one: Stupidius trollius. xD

[certainot]

82. talk radio paid callers is good value. & citizens united money means going to see a lot more of both

[Douglas Carpenter]

85. remember - the one absolute proof of someone being a troll is that they deny being a troll

There are two other absolute iron-clad proofs:

1. They find fault with the President and the Democratic Party so that they can demoralize Democrats and suppress voter turnout

2. They defend the President and the Democratic Party in order to drive a centrist agenda and empower the corporatist

If you ever discover anyone doing either of those two things - you know you have a troll. If they deny being a troll - that confirms it 100%.

[sabrina 1]

118. Lol!

[Enthusiast]

162. Good one, Douglas.

I happen to have solid information that Douglas is a commonly used troll name.

[tammywammy]

183. LOL! n/t

[caseymoz]

86. Let's face it. Corporations all have their agents, provocateurs and crumbots.

And that last one is going to become more and more intelligent. It's the same with governments. In this bad economy, they're going to be able to hire more. What's bad is when they nearly outnumber the rest of us. It means you have to check information and you have to weigh the argument given. Despite the illusion, a bad argument doesn't get better when somebody else makes it.

[PatrynXX]

90. I trust posters here and huffpo

than MSM. rarely read MSM comments because 1/2 of them are Fox watchers by far. in the joke area..

[darth marth]

93. a couple more threads discussing this topic

How common do you honestly think it is for paid operatives to post on progressive forums?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2387178

COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2387552

'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.'

TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues.

'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered.

'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.

GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes."

[Zorra]

107. Lol! you beat me by a minute

See post #94

We were thinking the same thing at the same time.
:hi:

[patrice]

111. + a million - Should be required reading here. AND WE SHOULD DISCUSS this kind of stuff when we

think it is going on. Instead of being shut-down; such discussions should go forward in a specially dedicated environment, with the participation of certain (agreed upon) very specific kinds of posters.

[SidDithers]

170. I laugh when posters pull threads from the Conspiracy Theory dungeon to try to prove their point...

:rofl:

Sid

[Zorra]

173. "Hey, look, ma! It's another red herring!"

Dispute the veracity of the content if you can.

Belittling the content because of one of the forums that it was posted in?

No.

Fail.

[SidDithers]

176. BHN's thread wasn't posted in the Conspiracy Theory forum...

it was moved there because it, like most of the other woo down there, isn't reliable information.

Sid

[Zorra]

182. And that proves what? That's actually extremely disturbing when you think about it.

I've personally seen a number of the tactics posted in the article used on the internet, and even alerted the mods here at DU to "forum sliding" in LBN back before the 2004 election.

[Evasporque]

198. Fast simple rules to make your DU less polluted by paid trolls...

1. Ignore any tit for tat argument participants...

I found that a handful of posters were entering into tit for tat arguments on distraction type posts. You know the long diagonal threads between two people....after I ignored several, the number of distraction news items and RW echo posts at the top of GD and LBN dropped dramatically. Use the ignored people to identify posts targeted by paid trolls for promotion. Other distraction originating posters will attract these ignored people and you can see it clearly by sheer number of ignored threads arguing with each other in a long chain. After the same poster has attracted the ignored to their OP distraction posts repeatedly...they get ignored. Genuine debate is easily differentiated from tit for tat distraction for post bumping.

2. Ignore Limbaugh, Colter and other RW Repeaters

There are also a handful of poster responsible for re-posting daily topics spewed by Rush Limbaugh. After I targeted Rush and Colter posts...I am now mostly free of seeing that dribble. It was pretty clear that a handful of posters were again responsible for polluting DU with numerous RW echo posts.


Overall the paid trolls are about distraction and dilution of discussion while propagating RW talking points.

I don't have but a couple dozen people on my iggie list but as a result my DU has become a more civil and informative place after I started ignoring a handful of people

[aletier_v]

115. Won't work

Manipulators will simply upgrade the capability of their software puppets to elude
detection. It is inevitable.

[McCamy Taylor]

123. Agree. Software won't work. You have to do it yourself.

[McCamy Taylor]

122. Here is my fool proof plan for messing with the corporatew poster. Figure out which industry

he represents. This is usually extremely easy. Then, ignore his attempts to derail the thread. Instead, start posting lots of information about how his company/party/self (occasionally people do this for themselves) has been naughty. Add enough factual information to the thread that makes his employer look bad enough and he will stop posting, because he will not want to keep the thread kicked. I have used this numerous times and it always works.

Never ever accuse someone directly of being paid, because they can use this to get the thread locked and tombstoned.

[McCamy Taylor]

126. Another clue: anyone whose detailed knowledge of an industry or issue seems at odds with his "just

plain folks" online persona. For instance, on a message board a woman who claims to be a "California housewife" who knows health insurance industry jargon is a fake. Used to see the Serbians do this a lot during the Clinton administration. They always had anglo sounding names. The Chinese do this too. Anyone who posts anything in support of China's occupation of Tibet is a paid Chinese poster. Always. Because every other country and industry in the world craves Tibet's natural resources for itself.

[SidDithers]

171. "Anyone who posts anything in support of China's occupation of Tibet is a paid Chinese poster"...

:thumbsup:

Sid

[WCGreen]

149. Yes, I don't even bother anymore at the local paper....

These people are there all the time, spewing the same old same old...

[chrisa]

155. I remember reading a hilariously dishonest example a few months ago.

I forget exactly where it was, but it had to do with computer hardware. On a hardware review forum, one of the posters who seemed to be a little too enthusiastic about a certain company's line of hardware (pretty much kissing the floor with everything the company put onto the market, and killing all other competitors' hardware) was actually a high-ranking member of that company / paid plant. It was proven and documented, with the company admitting it in the end (and trying to back peddle with some lame excuse).

The thing is, this forum was supposed to allow those who are more experienced with hardware help those who are less experienced with their purchasing decisions. This was a clear ethical failure and embarrassment for that company.

I didn't think such a problem existed until I saw that.

[Warren DeMontague]

168. Some of it, I think, is driven by a weird form of actual mental illness

I think some of these people get real invested in their assorted "identities". It's weird.

[Bobbie Jo]

175. Spot on...

Please note:

"However, fakes can be spotted by analysing their patterns of activity and the words they use, say the researchers. Fakes are more likely to start new comment threads, make inane comments rather than add to a debate, and repeat former comments with minor changes, the study suggests. The researchers say they are refining software tools to help website administrators tackle the "painful" problem."


I Believe It.

:kick:

[Number23]

177. Ha!

I Believe It. :spray: :spray: :rofl:

This thread is hilarious. You see the same 5 or 6 names over and over and over again. People who never have anything positive to say about the president or about the Dems and who post OPs from some of the most deranged, disreputable "sources" on the Internet. Sources so unhinged and devoid of truth they make The Onion look real. But here they are, all up in this thread talking about "smoking out trolls."

It's very rare to see this much unintentional comedy in one place. For free, anyway.

[SidDithers]

195. Yup...

:thumbsup:

Sid

[Populist_Prole]

202. They'll post at wee-hours to have the "last word" for at least a few hours too.

I'm not referring to DU, but forums in general. Another thing is the lack of passion in their posts: On one hand they post all the time...too much to be a hobby, but are not very eloquent...meaning they're just being hired hacks of a sort.

[snooper2]

196. I guess that's 62.43% of the people on DU including me

"make inane comments rather than add to a debate"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: