LJ meta: trolls

[cellio]

Now that LiveJournal has eliminated invite codes, there are (apparently) more troll accounts -- people create a disposable account simply to harrass people and then move on. People who run communities are having trouble with this because it's extra administrative load to ban them, delete their comments, etc. This complaint I understand.

I gather that some people have created troll communities with provocative names and added people as members without their consent. This complaint I definitely understand, as the presumption is that you choose your communities. I would like it if being added to a community (as opposed to adding myself) generated an email challenge/response cycle, actually, like some mailing-list software does.

Some people are also upset that trolls add them as friends. They are, apparently, upset at seeing certain names on their friend-of lists. This complaint I do not understand; no one has any control over who lists you as a friend, so how could any thinking person hold it against you if someone objectionable supposedly reads your journal? I was recently added by someone I didn't recognize, and when I went to the journal to investigate I found one "this is my journal" message with about 20 comments saying "take me off your list you filthy troll". (The comments, and later the entry, have since been deleted.) Now I don't have any personal experience with this person, troll or not, and have no basis for judgement, but the reactions seem extreme to me. Besides, isn't that just what they want -- to get people worked up?

By the way, a post in news today said that they are working on breaking the "friends" notion into its two different parts, subscriptions and access control. I look forward to seeing how they do that. I wonder which parts will be public (the way friends are now). I also idly wonder about the sociological effects when people are able to designate some of their "friends" with "I actually read you" and others as "I don't follow you but I trust you with my secrets". I predict lots of angst among the high-school contingent.

Comments

[cafemusique.livejournal.com]

The only concern that I heard that might have had some validity (if it turned out to be true) is that somebody lost a job (or was turned down for a job), because a check on them revealed a "friend of" with inappropriate material in their journal. The "friends" terminology could be confusing to those who are not familiar with LJ, I guess. (But the "if it's true" is a big if, and if it is, you would think the person checking would make sure to find out what "friends of" means on the site.)

I had one of those serial adders friend me this week. Something like 750 friends...at least she had some interesting entries.

And, after all, if people are really upset about seeing a name like that on their "friends of," there's an option to hide the entire list. Sounds simple to me. *shrug* Some people. *grin*

Re:

[cellio]

Some employers are stupid, I guess. But someone could just as easily sabotage your chances with such a company by creating unflattering web pages about you and waiting for Google's spiders to do their thing. And that is a big "if", yes; this sort of thing is also conducive to legends and wishful thinking. ("I didn't get the job because of that jerk! Nah, couldn't have anything to do with my qualifications...".)

I had one of those serial adders friend me this week. Something like 750 friends...at least she had some interesting entries.

The accused troll I was talking about has something like 360 subscriptions. I've seen no evidence that this person is actually reading those journals. On the other hand, one of my subscribers has over 400 subscriptions and comments here occasionally, so I know she's reading. I can't imagine keeping up with that many journals myself, unless some of them are very infrequent. (The only reason I can manage my current subscription list is that a bunch of them post rarely, like once every month or two.)