2012-02-17 10:45:13What is PRATT?
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.175.176

Sorry if I've missed something but what does PRATT stand for and which part of the comments policy does this comment violate?

Gras Albert at 09:36 AM on 17 February 2012 (Email commenter)
I completely agree, the correlation between recent rises in CO2 ppm and global mean temperature is obvious see http://tinyurl.com/7frlflz
Deleted by Daniel Bailey (PRATT & Trolling)
2012-02-17 11:06:34
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
174.253.17.123

PRATT: point refuted a thousand times. The above deleted comment in question sought to rehash the no warming since 2002 meme.

I.e., a straw-man argument designed strictly to drive a thread off on a snipe/hunt/wild-goose-chase.  No real dialogue intended.

2012-02-17 11:37:46
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.175.176

I would really like to, when I get time, reprogram moderation so there is a drop down for the reason for deletion. This will impose a stricter structure on moderation - the reason for deletion will have to adhere to comments policy. Problem is I'm incredibly swamped right now with a few huge tasks looming over my head like Damocles sword so it's hard to see it getting done soon. But I am a little worried that moderation has a tendency to stray into areas not covered by the moderation policy and comments are being deleted because we disagree with their arguments rather than based on behaviour.

2012-02-17 15:04:26
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
97.83.150.37

With respect, you mean behavior specifically banned by the comments policy. Not things like trolling, making things up or repeating memes debunked and rebunked ad nauseum.

2012-02-17 15:43:40
Tom Curtis

t.r.curtis@gmail...
112.213.173.31

John, the comments policy states:

 

Links to useful resources are welcome (see HTML tips below). However, comments containing only a link will be deleted. At least provide a short summary of the content of the webpage to facilitate discussion (and show you understand the page you're linking to). Similarly, images are very welcome as they can be very useful in explaining the science. But comments with pictures in isolation without explanation will be deleted." 

The offending post provided a link to HadCRUT3 temperatures and ESRL CO2 levels from 2002-2012 at woodfortrees:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2002/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2002/trend/plot/esrl-co2/normalise/from:2002/plot/esrl-co2/normalise/from:2002/trend

I cannot see any description of that content in the offending comment.  Ergo the comment violates the comments policy.

2012-02-17 16:23:42Tom, in that case...
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.175.176

... the reason "link only" would be given but I don't think that was what Daniel was thinking when deleting this comment.

If a person is posting a meme debunked elsewhere, then this is off-topic and the appropriate moderator response is to provide a link to the relevant SkS where it is debunked - and then delete any subsequent attempts to repost the same meme after having already received the first warning.

But trolling or making things up - there is no official moderator policy for those types of comments. So either moderators stop using those as reasons for deleting comments or we have a discussion on the merits of expanding the comments policy.

2012-02-17 16:31:32
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
97.83.150.37

Gras Albert is a snark:

Comments by Gras Albert

I completely agree, the correlation between recent rises in CO2 ppm and global mean temperature is obvious see

http://tinyurl.com/7frlflz
Posted on 2012-02-17 09:36:59 at Breaking News…The Earth Is Warming…Still!
IP: 195.60.16.189

 

 

Followed soon after by this boojum's comment:

Comments by Whisky Kilo

Who are you addressing Stephen? Has another denier been zapped?

It's good see so much evidence supporting your argument Glenn, I'm glad that all the indicators showing reduced warming in the past decade or so are false.
Posted on 2012-02-17 09:57:26 at Breaking News…The Earth Is Warming…Still!
IP: 195.60.16.189

 

Note the IP's...

2012-02-17 16:58:45
Tom Curtis

t.r.curtis@gmail...
112.213.173.31

John, with respect, I have been trying to get a discussion going of appropriate changes to the comments policy.  I have not been pushing it just lately because everybody obviously has so much on their plate, and most do not consider it a high priority.  Further, the two clauses in the proposed modified comments policy introduced to make it possible to eliminate simple trolling comments such as Gras Albert's are the two proposed clauses that you object to.

 

IMO, the question is, do we want endless threads of constantly repeating denier memes like the 2nd law thread, or do we want threads to be focussed and informative.  If the former, you need to give the moderators the tools (ie, the appropriate modifications to the comments policy) in order to do so.  If you are happy with the later, however, then you are right to insist on a minimalist comments policy, and strict compliance by moderators.  However, I personally think it would be foolish for anyone to volunteer to moderate under the later policy.

 

The problems are arising because of the evident frustration of the moderators in trying to keep the threads clear of trolling with a comments policy that does not properly empower them to do so.

2012-02-17 22:10:10
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
97.83.150.37

"If you are happy with the later, however, then you are right to insist on a minimalist comments policy, and strict compliance by moderators.  However, I personally think it would be foolish for anyone to volunteer to moderate under the later policy."

I recognize John's right to pursue any policy he wishes WRT to moderation and the Comments Policy, but if it is to be along the direction Tom has outlined above (which I am ok with), then count me out.

2012-02-18 06:19:39
Rob Painting
Rob
paintingskeri@vodafone.co...
118.92.58.165

It's foolish to adhere to a set of rules which are not yet adequately designed to deal with trolls when we are the ones creating the rules!

Let's not fall into the trap of inferring there's debate where none exists. Just modify the bloody comments policy to sort these toerags out and move on!

And JC, you have to adopt the dispassionate viewpoint when these trolls send whining emails to you. They are playing on your emotions. Don't let them. Whether they are malicious in intent, decieved, or simply misinformed they are the bad guys, and we cannot let them continue to destroy Earth.

 

2012-02-18 07:56:22
John Hartz
John Hartz
john.hartz@hotmail...
98.122.98.161

JC:

For the record, I concur with Tom, Dan, and Rob. SkS should not provide commentors a platform for trolling and is under absolutely no obligation to do so.

If you want to impose a minimist comments policy, you may well have to moderate the comment threads all by your lonesome.