Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Rules against "trolls" on websites. "Trolling" seems to be a term that can mean whatever you want it to mean..

And more often than not I see that term thrown at people by groups online to justify mob-like bullying, and by unprofessional moderators to penalise users over personal disagreement or just general dislike of them as a person.

Ironically, these two groups act more in the manner I imagine when I think of the term "troll".

We live in an age that pushes tolerance, inclusion, kindness etc. Yet we are still humans with a dark side to each of us. As a consequence, we've paradoxically actually become less tolerant and nice, as we convince ourselves that the unfair ways we treat others is fine because they have committed some ill that makes them a "troll", or some other buzzword like an "ist", or a "phobe". And we actually go much further down the abusive path as we have convinced ourselves that this person deserves it and it's the moral thing to do.

Not saying this due to having any strikes - I don't have any - just an observation.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
When the mod's the troll, common with reddit, you cannot win.
Therealsteve · 31-35, M
@NativePortlander1970 Explains the often "no experts" rule, simply so no one can challenge them. The reason is "it's impossible to tell if you really are the person who owns that certificate".

Last time I checked, and there are websites that do this, I could take a photo of myself holding my passport open, with a piece of paper containing my name, username and that day's date. And then I can provide the certificates.
@Therealsteve I recently got banned from a subreddit for saying how I stopped the dog shitting on everyone's lawn after we had moved into a new rental house in may 2002, black pepper sprinkled on the edges of everyone's lawn, cited for "animal cruelty" 🙄🤦