In comments on Dr. Roy’s Facebook page about him turning comments off on his blog because he’s simply tired of dealing with sockpuppeting troll Douglas J. Cotton, there was this quote that I thought was very, very succinct and appropriate. It also applies to the climate debate in general.
“The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.” :- Alberto Brandolini
Source: https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/11485742.Alberto_Brandolini
Spencer replied:
That quote is a great description of what has been happening. Person #1 can put together a meaningless string of technical jargon. Person #2 can say, “that makes no sense at all!” Person #1 then says, “sorry you don’t know enough to understand it.” It just goes downhill from there..
Indeed, and the amount of energy expended by me and others is great. We walk a very fine line here, trying to balance giving a legitimate forum to open and honest people, while ferreting out and limiting people who simply want to disrupt the conversation via sockpuppetry. It is a lot of work. If I didn’t have volunteer moderators for WUWT, I probably would have gone the way of Spencer long ago. Since we routinely process a thousand or more comments a day here, many of which are from sockpuppeters and posers (you know who you are with special attention to K-man) It would certainly give me more time to research and write articles. It’s certainly less effort.
So, I thought it was time to ask the question:
Doug, don’t even try to comment here again.
The articles are great, but the comments are everything. WUWT is a society. Cut off comments and you’d close that down.
Added to that, a warning – if the trolls think you are on the brink of shutting comments, they’d see it as very close to shutting you down completely. Expect a ramp up of their efforts to push you that way.
This site is an oasis to many and rich with information and communication. It hasn’t grown to the size it is and with the popularity it has without a reason.
Doug C. doesn’t want his soapbox to be taken away. He’s on our side in the big picture…it just is he uses dodgy science in the process (I’m being kind). Plus, that’s ALL he does…if you did a post on pizza toppings, his comments would not change.
Roy I don’t know this guy at all but for you to take a drastic step to cease all dialogue suggests that he has taken your enjoyment out of your blog. I read a few things that he has written and I can’t say that I agree with his line of reasoning but I did get the sense that he is no friend of AGW. Maybe he just likes you in an inappropriate kind of way.
I don’t think we want dodgy science or those supporting it on our side.
Lets leave that for the CAGW crowd.
Much respect for your work, please do not let a few irritants stop you.
I agree. I sometimes wonder if he is not one person but a team.
That said, it was the banter between trolls and those who knew what they were talking about that first captured me so many years ago. Sometimes the trolls were plain foolish and sometimes they were looking for a fight, but the responses to them were so amazingly patient and clear – I learned more from those willing to respond to them than I ever did in school.
That interaction has always been important to me. Amusing too. Some trolls think they are kicking over something but instead they allow others to shine and to teach. I’m addicted now, I’m in here every single day and have been for years.
I’m so sorry you’ve had a hugely negative and on-going experience with that particular individual. I wish there was an easy solution and something that did not cost you hours of your time. You are clearly an important target to them and you have done so much – for all of us.
Whatever you do, I for one wish you well. Always. You’ve been an inspiration.
@ur momisugly Paul Westhaver March 11, 2016 at 1:41 pm
Paul,
Here is a link for you from Roy’s post of January of 2015:
Doug C as Plan.Physics
This link takes you to my comment. Doug’s is just above mine, that I made after reading many of his repeated attempts at informing. I give the subtitle of Dale Carnegie’s book “How to Win Friends & Influence People.”
It did not help him.
I’m sad about Roy’s decision because he does some interesting time-lapse and other stuff that I much enjoy and have responded to.
John F,
Thank-you. I will follow the link and read the comments. Then come back.
Please keep up the great work Anthony, the trolls and sock puppets are only attracted here because this is the greatest blog on the net. Without your work they would be nothing and could do nothing. They are a nuisance like mosquitos and have as much brain-power as mosquitos.
I must say that I find the comments section on WUWT a large part of the attraction of this invaluable blog, for me. And I am unaware of there being many intrusions by trolls; I imagine this is partly, or even mainly, because of first-class moderation.
Comments sections such as the one below Christopher Booker’s articles on the Telegraph descend into farce so overwhelmed is it by warmist trolls. Thank all-that-is-good that that never happens here!
Although I hardly ever ‘tweet’ (apart from accidentally!), I do use a Twitter account to log in to comment on here AND on many other sites because it is so ubiquitous and avoids having to register and then sign in on various multiple sites. That was my original and only reason for opening a Twitter account.
Add to my above comment that I use the same registration for commenting on Disqus platforms and I have the majority of comments sections covered.
I second (third?) Doug in Calgary who said: “I agree with Tom. My background is not scientific but I have learned so much not only from the articles and essays but also from the comments that come from many of the learned people that have taken the time to share their knowledge here. I, like many others, come to this site daily… the lively debate is all part of the quality of the site.
Keep up the great work Anthony, you are a large injection of sanity in a screwed up world.”
I have learned so much here, mostly from the excellent posters (Willis, Bob T, I’m looking at you) but also from the give-and-take of honest and often very knowledgeable commenters. Please don’t let the few idiots destroy that fabulous shared resource. Thanks.
The BS artists and the Propagandists, always expose themselves. It’s just a matter of time, until they do. Better to give them all the rope they need…
Shutting off comments ==> Generally, comments should be allowed to run more-or-less unimpeded. There are a lot of Junior Climate Warriors here — who make a lot of noise and do not add to the conversation. Nonetheless, they can usually be easily ignored.
You might try a system of sign-ins…in which readers who have proved their mettle can be invited to become “a member” — I have no idea if WordPress allows this kind of thing. If nothing else, something like a “denizens” page on which other readers could check out a commenter.
Even with members, everyone can comment, but members/denizens can be identified and read, while jabbering jambocks can be safely ignored or read.
As an occassional author here, I try to respond to comments to my essay’s if they are asking or question or I feel the comment requires additional clarification or information from me. I have gotten pretty good at ignoring nonsense.
It would not be a terrible feature to allow authors/moderators to cut off comments from a particular person on a particular piece — with a boilerplate notice to that effect, inviting them to come back and comment another time. This would help with the extremely-overly persistent, must-have-the-last-word wackos.
No, try to hang in there. At least until the DOJ and the obama cultist shut down all dissent through the courts.
Not gonna happen.
“The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.”
– Alberto Brandolini
That is a great quote. Illogical arguments can be produced at a tremendous rate.
When Roy Spencer stop blogging because of Douglas J. Cotton, it is a minor step back for Roy Spencer – but a giant step back for mankind.
So which bridge is David Appell going to troll now that he can’t do so at Roy Spencer’s?
Appell , apparently physics PhD from Stony Brook , is my personal troll and apparently scans Disqus for any comment I make anywhere about anything and perseverates in posting multiply asked and answered question but seems incapable of understanding even the most fundamental physical notions like the interchangeability of space and time by division by the lightsecond . He is the only person I have banned from posting on http://CoSy.com .
I consider the blog posting of comments the defining difference between “old” media and “new” .
I think banning all comments because of a few bad actors when you can selectively ban those individual is a retreat into near irrelevance .
While I’ve not been familiar with Cotten , a quick google browse seems to show his “theory” whatever it is , rather scatterbrained bringing in all sorts of stuff .
But that does not vitiate the fact that I have yet to see any quantitative equation explaining how some cascade of optical filters between a surface and an energy source can “trap” a higher energy density at that surface than that between those filters and the energy source — or any experimental demonstration of the effect . That is , how some set of filters can trap , in the case of Venus , an energy density at its surface more than 25 times that which the Sun supplies in its orbit .
If Roy can supply the essential equations , or better yet , an experimental demonstration of the phenomenon , I know certainly my , what has come to be total , disbelief in the GHG explanation of planetary surface temperatures being greater than that calculated for the spectra as seen from the outside will vanish instantly .
However , that will still leave a conundrum as to what to do with HockeySchtick’s rather straightforward , and backed by classical references , computations based on gravity which apparently explain Venus’s surface temperature within 1% .
As it currently stands , the GHG theory provides no computations to challenge the “gravity” hypothesis at all
Maybe it is a custom to dig up spectacular names, but how is it that so few comments with their own name.
You could think they are afraid of there own inner thaughts. It could be a thing of the internet.
Svend,
Someday I may look toward retirement,, with 15 or 20 years of a government job first. I am pretty sure that I would be excluded from more that half of potential areas just forof being here (and not just because of my childish comments).
I may be overly cautious, but I don’t think I’m paranoid.
If we cut off comments, where would I study the fine writings of RGBatDuke?
I have the same opinion as Lief on the matter of comment style, I enjoyed the clasic name/time based flow, I thought it was more respectful taking the time to construct a reply (even if it is refuted or disagreeable) rather than simply click a reply button, to me it seems to be laziness, maybe it’s just convenience, I still stand by my opinion from the time of the changes ‘If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it’
I also think the commenters here are awesome and aren’t so thin skined, I know some commenters hate to receive compliments as well, the thing is, you don’t know and you won’t know what a person is like until you interact with them and begin to understand their mannerisms.
🙂 there’s always a cold beer to cool down over lol
I voted “no”…but it’s my blog. My personal preference would be to keep the comments. They are a large part of what has made WUWT what it is. But I don’t know what goes on behind the scenes to keep it going. What it cost Anthony and the mods?
Anthony is asking for our opinions. But it’s his that matters.
PS If comments stay, maybe Dr. Spencer would donate some time as a mod?
TYPO!!!
“I voted “no”…but it’s my blog.”
Should be:
“I voted “no”…but it’s NOTmy blog.”
(Hope I didn’t just give him a reason to end comment! 😎
*sigh*
…LOL
…when I don’t even have time to moderate my own blog?
Roy,
Have you heard sleep is over rated?
I misunderstood something. I thought you were shutting down your blog and so might have some “free time”.
Sorry.
I value your value whether you “blog” or “mod” or not.
I can think of many better things for Roy to donate time to.
Don’t use the same tactics so common on the CAGW side. Shutting down opposing voices is not the answer. Who decides what gets shut down? Who guards the guardians? Free speech should be protected – though of course no one has a right to take over a thread.
The real issue is trolls who take over a thread with dozens of comments which add little value and deliberately annoy or suppress other readers so much that they give up and leave. The answer to this is quite simple, limit any poster to say three posts per thread. Anyone can comment but no-one can take over the thread. This would also encourage posters to collect their thoughts before posting – not a bad thing in itself.
Bernard, pay attention to the issues discussed. There is no way to enforce such a policy. The commenter just comes in with a new screen name/IP address. That’s what DJC does. There is no “quite simple” answer.
Roy, I am paying attention and was trying to help Anthony with a suggestion for WUWT. I would agree with you about enforcement not being perfect – but there is no perfect solution to fix 100% of this problem. Limiting the number of posts, followed say by a ban for known trolls, augmented by snipping or simply disappearing offending posts would get rid of most of the offenders who annoy WUWT readers. Of course, if someone is prepared to devote their entire life to annoy you, which seems to be your situation, then there’s not much you can do about it! I hope Andrew tries all the other options before he gets rid of comments entirely which to me is throwing out the baby with the bath water.
I suppose I only have one more post after this … better make it a good one!
Oops, Sorry, Anthony – I meant you, not Andrew!
Drat .. that’s my last post!
And Bernard, those out to shut up opposing views will do anything to do so.
“The end justifies the means” is their mantra. Dr.Spencer and Anthony are honest and ethical.
That is not their mantra. But that is what they are up against in the “blogoshere” and real life.
They don’t make their living running a blog. I suspect it started as an interest and grew from there.
I don’t know what happens on their end or what it takes to deal with the “assaulters”.
Until human nature universally changes, the assaulters will, at times get through.
The various hosts of the various blogs, at times, have to evaluate their personal priorities.
If one chooses to no longer put words on a screen, I may miss them but I will not fault them.
They’ve given us much that they did not owe.
How would you enforce the three posts per thread rule given that the free WordPress account has no mechanism for that? It would be a pain to catch them in the moderation stream, it would be a pain to write software to check recent posts for violations.
Do you have time to count posts and flag the ones deserving rejection?
I sort of hate to say this, and I hope it doesn’t sound obnoxious, but one might consider these kinds of burdens to be the price of success.
Thank you for the service you provide us, Mr. Watts.
I voted earlier and again Anthony, please do not shut down the comment section, besides the fact that many of us are learning from those insights from people better educated that me, the other part that to me is beneficial is the fact we are a community that is global, we learn each others political, environmental and the overall society we live in. The banter, the humor many times have left me feeling better about us as human beings besides the fact that I get pointed into directions that really interests me and others. The occasional bad apple is easily chucked out and ignored, maybe just leave them on to show their own total ignorance..
What asybot said X 2.
Thank you Anthony and the Mods! (Doo-wop, do-waaaah…)
Articles without the ability to comment are meant to persuade not inform.
Many (most?) CAGW articles do not allow commentary because the narrative is often lost with a couple of common sense comments.
Dropping the comments would be a terrible idea imo
James
FWIW, I voted “no”.
As of this time there are only about 750 votes.
Where is everybody ?, I’m starting to wonder about our reach, it is a totally anonymous poll.
Why is nobody voting ?
Why is nobody voting?
People are at work?
WUWT has a global reach. For some, this is the middle of the night.
..Adding a SPAM button would let other readers decide when some one is just trolling ! If enough readers hit the SPAM button, the comment and commenter are blocked for the day ( or a week ) !
well..i don’t know this guy, but this should not be public..some people can put all their heart in some klind of a crusade and badly hurt…
i do understand it is tiring..but this guy is a human being , that doesn’t have to be public…
i know it is easy to say…
Poll answers not a shock ……. I’ve got my own problems. Got a budget. X Millions for the next few years and projected costs of Y millions with a 25% variance in the two. Have to make some life changing decisions and not terribly happy about it. When push comes to shove one needs to protect the majority. It’s all we can do…. when considering the greater good. We sometimes we have to incur a personal cost. It’s the price that we pa sty for the position we take. So suck it up. Is the only advice I have. Going to have to do the same myself.. stand up for the greater good you really have no choice.
“The real issue is trolls who take over a thread with dozens of comments which add little value and deliberately annoy or suppress other readers so much that they give up and leave.”
I don’t think there is any question that this kind of thing is being orchestrated. You get it on other news sites, when any question of climate or renewable energy comes up. Chances are the posters have been briefed on how to run a trolling campaign. What makes this seem likely is the similarity of the tactics across sites. Though, it does seem to be declining. Maybe the funds to pay the trolls have dried up, or maybe they’ve just realised it won’t work anyway.
It should not be a surprise that this goes on, when NGOs are funded by renewables manufacturers, and those NGOs in turn send out pickets to barricade shale gas sites.
Anthony Watts , I voted No.
I saw the off topic comment by “john March 11, 2016 at 12:07 pm”. It caused me to do some reading and learning. I would miss the loss of such experiences.
even the O.T. stuff can be useful.
Also Anthony most of us like one another and if nothing else just enjoy saying “Hi” .
michael duhancik
I think this is a great site for the other side of the debate. But I read article after article that more or less says the effect of CO2 on climate is nil or so insignificant as to not matter. However people still cling to the Greenhouse Theory. As far as I’m concerned Robert Wood disproved that theory over 100 years ago. If the Greenhouse effect is responsible for 33C of warmth then the increase in temperature due to increase CO2 should be pronounced and observable, which it is not. I think people like DC become frustrated when people will not admit the inconsistency of their position.
I voted ‘no’. I wish there were an option to vote hell no.
Some points:
1) A moderately healthy culture is an extremely argumentative place. But, the most free and completely open segments of the healthiest cultures are 10 times more extremely argumentative. Some of the arguers will be like Douglas Cotton, and we can all help in dealing with them.
2) Anonymity can be serially abused by some anonymous commenters to the detriment of our host and the WUWT community. I suggest the larger anonymous community at WUWT take more responsibility to stop the destructiveness of the worst of the anonymity abusers. They would be protecting the privilege of anonymous commenting.
3) The moderation at WUWT is it life’s blood and it is vital to discuss it. Perhaps there should be a permanent moderation discussion thread where focus is on all aspects of moderation. I would find that beneficial to have a place to always go to discuss moderation; but the purpose should not be a complaint department for people wou feel they have been wronged by moderators.
4) Regarding ‘trolls’, I am sick and tired of the troll name calling. Instead of troll name calling please stick to specifying the violation of site policy a commenter is allegedly abusing.
5) Some enterprising individual could create a service establishing a shared moderation pool of available pre-vetted/pre-qualified moderators that blog owners can tap at need.
6) the comments at WUWT are 99% of the value which is essentially educational value; even the abuses by some commenters is very educational to learn about the real world of intellectual discourse in the open marketplace of ideas.
I love what Anthony has created.
John
In case no one knew, “Gunga Din” is not my real name. I use it because I have a government job where it has “gone green”. While I don’t comment from work or on the clock, there are “Green Goons” out there might seek to cause problems for me.
I don’t use anonymity to “hide” so much as to protect myself.
True, some use it to “snipe” from cover but not all.
Gunga Din on March 11, 2016 at 3:59 pm
– – – – – – –
Gunga Din,
Well said. I was thinking that long term and veteran anonymous commenters such as yourself take a more proactive role to stop anonymity abusing commenters to protect your right to be anonymous. At what point does site management consider increasing of anonymity focused guidelines? I don’t know, but Anthony sounds pretty exasperated to me.
John