h a l f b a k e r yI think, therefore I am thinking.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
login
|
|
|
First Shot Callout
First nasty anno on a post gets reaction of [FS] standing for "first shot". |
| |
(+4,
-1)
| |
|
|
The idea is to respond [FS] to the first nasty statement
on
a HB idea post that was up till then light hearted,
friendly
and fun.
When flame wars are in full force sometimes it gets lost
who started them, this is a way to call that out and
possibly avoid them.
So somebody might post:
"Happy Smile Shaped Donuts"
and
somebody responds "Sounds like the kind of crap a
particular politician I hate would eat, same for his fat
disgusting followers."
Rather than either ignoring the troll, which backfires
often
times because they take that as a victory, or fighting
back,
which reduced this place to a nasty mess, you just call it
out for what it is, the first shot of a war that nobody
necessarily wants. You type [FS] and leave it.
This would also serve to protect people who are merely
responding to the other person's call for war because
defense is moral, offense is immoral. Often times the
defenders get blamed for flamewars they didn't start.
This would prevent that. Put it on the record who
started it. It would also call out flame warriors who act
like victims when they start losing flame wars THEY
started.
Wonder if that might be a tool to make our beloved HB a
friendlier place. It might remind the person posting the
nasty anno that they're starting something they might
not even be cognizant of.
Hey, I wouldn't mind somebody tapping me on the
shoulder and reminding me that a statement is gonna
fire some people up. I'd hopefully just say "Oh yea,
oops." and take it down.
And note, this doesn't apply to annotations and bones
criticizing an idea, it's only for very nasty personal
insults, ad hominem attacks or obvious calls for a flame
war.
ADDENDUM: Per scad's idea, good followup to [FS] would be
[NRF], "not returning fire".
only vaguely related ...
Arch-enemy_20Matchmaker_20Service
[normzone, Sep 18 2024]
What a lovely day in the HB…
https://imgflip.com/i/a731lp
Lol! [doctorremulac3, Sep 28 2025]
|
| |
Maybe it was a car backfiring. |
|
| |
Between saccharine overload and a hell of spiteful sniping there is a happy medium of spirited, friendly debate. [+] |
|
| |
Total agreement, debate is great, personal is…
something bad that rhymes with personal. |
|
| |
Great idea, though after reading through the title, subtitle
and first 3 paragraphs, I was starting to mentally prepare
my rebuttal. Up to that point, it sounded like you were
just trying to document who started the argument so you
can blame them (also paragraph 5). I think it would be
better to emphasize that the purpose is to avoid a flame
war (paragraph 4), and that this avoids something
unintentional becoming a flame war (paragraphs 6 and 7). |
|
| |
Towards that end, could this idea be refined with a flag
change? [FS] "First Shot" implies that there will be or has
already been a second shot. A single shot followed by
silence or an apology (the ideal we're aiming for) is a single
shot, not a first shot. [FS] states that the other person
intentionally fired the shot. It also implies that the second
shot is righteous self defense, which invites arguments
about whether that was a real first shot or a car backfiring. |
|
| |
How about [NRF] "Not Returning Fire", meaning that the
above comment was something that could (rightly or
wrongly) cause me to fire back, but I am refraining. Also
good because shooting back with a NeRF gun is a lot safer. |
|
| |
So what you're saying is that you love Hitler? |
|
| |
I suppose one MIGHT interpret my annotation that way. |
|
| |
Lol! It’s jokes like that that bring me back. Hey,
that rhymes. And I like the [NRF] a lot. Perfect
companion to this. |
|
| |
//ad homonym attacks// I am SO keeping that. (Or something
that sounds just like it.) |
|
| |
Correction made. Thank you. |
|
| |
I didn't even know that Nyms could become gay... |
|
| |
Think it's clearly time for this too. |
|
| |
You're minding your own business, somebody takes a shot at you, you mark it. [FS] (first shot) then either respond or better yet, just put in a "[NRF]". |
|
| |
Won't stop the trolling, probably actually encourage it, but at least they couldn't get way with this "You started it! Boo hoo!" nonsense. |
|
| |
Take the high road out of the whole Hatebakery thing. |
|
| |
I guess I'm willing to try the NRF thing. Maybe it would help to make it explicit that you're showing restraint rather than just accepting a comment.
But why not just write it out? There's no particular reason to add an opaque acronym - it just makes it more likely to be misunderstood or ignored. |
|
| |
Posted an idea to ratify this by popular consensus. |
|
| |
I note that idea has been deleted. Here's the reply I was working on there: |
|
| |
Certain replies have been interpreted by party of the second as full of vitriol at the same time party of the first claims to have intended them to have none. Third-party arbitration may be ideal in most other places, but filling up the halfbakery with such debate for a given claim would make it almost as unpleasant as filling it with vitriol. In the past the bakesperson has taken a stand in the case of extreme and obvious trolling but asking her to be more firm is, too, not ideal. |
|
| |
I would therefore suggest changing this to:
Spot the first Trollshot? DO NOT REPLY no matter how much better it would make you feel to reply. If you find you have replied, delete your reply without explaining it or replacing it with other meta-commentary. If, in the mean time your reply has been replied to, STILL delete your reply without explaining it or replacing it with other meta-commentary. A brief, highly generalized apology is acceptable. A snarky one is not. |
|
| |
In the mean time we all know who you're aiming this at. Can you PLEASE stop aiming your own hate at xenzag? This is not to invite discussion at who is in the wrong. Please stop. xenzag, you please stop too. This pattern of trolling, countertrolling, flaming and responding by BOTH OF YOU has caused serious harm to this place. You're like a couple of 10 year olds arguing over who poked who first. Just dont. If your name starts with dr or xen this means you. edit: it occurs to me you may have meant replying with "[FS]" and nothing else, even later, and even after the second and third shots. That would be fine too. |
|
| |
Yes, that was the idea. As for your suggestions, okay, we’ll see how that goes, A trolling free Halfbakery would truly be a wonderful thing. |
|
| |
Please stop trying to impose your own rules on what people can post or say here. Those are already outlined in the help section. We have freedom of speech here within a set of perfectly simple rules and no one needs to fear posting anything here that lies within those boundaries, and if they do, then point out the infrigement and leave it at that. For my part, I'll post whatever comes into my head, as I do, often, and I can confirm some of these will be halfbaked ideas that arise out of the toxic politics I observe in many parts of the world esp right now. These ideas will have as much humour, impracticality and sarcasm as I can muster. Watch out for this one when it surfaces: "I Am A Descendant From Leprechauns And Can Prove It, So Can I Have An Irish Passport Please?" |
|
| |
Well, there’s your answer V. |
|
| |
Re the insulting xenophobic leprechaun comment (based, ironically, on a conciliatory statement I made trying to usher in some peace by saying something nice about the keyboard warrior’s country.) FTS, (First Troll Shot.) Holding return fire. Let’s see if this works. |
|
| |
What if, hypothetically, 'baker X sincerely believed
a. that their provocations were educative and
b. that this project of education - through - provocation were their vocation, and a central part of their own self-image? |
|
| |
In that case, they could no more give up the practice of provocation than another person, 'baker Y, could give up, as it might be, their patriotism or their self-reliance. |
|
| |
The question of whether this provocation project *actually* helps to make the world better need not be resolved at this stage. |
|
| |
Now 'baker Y faces two possibilities. Either they might have something to learn from 'baker X or not. If they might have something to learn, then that's probably worth the annoyance of exposure to those provocations. If not, then they can simply ignore the provocations because, in that case, they are nothing but noise and don't constitute real attacks. |
|
| |
Understood in this way, these two possibilities present a Morton's Fork of Meh. |
|
| |
The Morton's Fork of Meh is an ancient artefact of my people, and confers a high degree of resistance to online sniping damage. You are welcome to borrow it. |
|
| |
Learned something new, and thank you for an interesting perspective Pert. |
|
| |