A panel debate discussing property social media trolling will take place next week.
On the panel will be Simon Whale of Kerfuffle, estate agents consultant Iain White, content writer Christopher Watkin, Vanessa Warwick of Property Tribes, and Russell Quirk of Properganda PR.
The debate, which will take place at 11am on Wednesday 24th February live on the Kerfuffle Facebook page, promises to be entertaining.
Warwick told EYE: “I’m really looking forward to this debate because, having experienced a great deal of trolling myself and witnessed it for over a decade on social media, I’m keen to explore and expose trolling behaviours and also share some of my proven methods of dealing it.
Quirk points out that trolling is a serious issue that can cause significant harm and distress.
He commented: “Simon Whale has put this together as no doubt a fun look at the world of commentators being lambasted.
“But there is a serious side of course in that some of the comments, whilst often wildly inaccurate and unnecessary, are libellous and can certainly pierce the skin of even the thickest epidermis.
“The issue that I will raise in particular is one of anonymity. Whilst I am the most passionate advocate of free speech – I think that you should be able to voice any opinion as long as it does not falsely seek to harm the reputation of another person. But I’m not sure that it’s right that those trolls without the courage to say who they are, have the right to represent their bile.
“More to the point, they wouldn’t be so bold face with someone that they are abusing, would they? I know this because I have asked many of those that have attacked me from behind their yellow curtains to face me for a debate yet they always immediately skulk off back to the bosom of their mummies.
“Let’s see how the debate goes.”
Comments (18)
So, I’ve given it plenty of time and – quelle suprise! – I never did hear back from the person trolling me on this thread. Like most trolls, they use a “hit and run” tactic – throw in a grenade, melt away, and leave the smoke to linger. Their work to cast false aspersions is done.
I noted the disingenuous dig “I’ve never heard of you so had to google you” to explain their actions, when I have been a columnist on EYE for many years and I’ve been in the property sector for nearly two decades.
However, due diligence is good and is welcomed by those who have nothing to hide.
If this person had a genuine agenda and wanted to understand content about me on social media, they would have responded to my requests and/or sent me the links I requested via email. I actually welcome that and asked for that as I don’t ever have a problem bringing clarity to an issue where someone is genuinely wanting to understand something.
They did neither, so that confirms to me that they were trolling me – someone wishing to cause harm and upset – the perfect example of this kind of activity – so I can only thank this individual for the value they have brought to this discussion by (ironically) providing such a great illustration of trolling behaviour.
I will use this example along with others at the debate.
Unfortunately it is often the case that many object to perfectly valid comments because it doesn’t fit in with their world view. They call such comments as trolling when it is no such thing. There are many snowflakes on social media that can’t cope with others having contrary opinions to theirs. Different perspectives on things is hardly trolling though this is how many consider those who have different opinions to them.
Touch blue light paper and stand back!
What matters is the content of what is said, not who is saying it. Freedom of speech, stops at which point? Are the public even interested in being that well versed? Slander and litigation is available for victims.
Trolling is not easy to define. Yes when the line is clearly crossed. Some is obvious, but when it is close to the line, who decides if it went over or not? It all revolves around opinion and if you ever spoke to some Trump supporters you would know how infuriating that can be.
Social media created an animal that perpetrated the dark side for some, who do nothing but antagonise for the sheer self-enjoyment of watching the fall out and fake news is rife.
You will never stop it, move on with your life, they are sadly hear to stay. Often entertaining to watch (as long as someone isnt being hurt!)
Freedom of speech: The power or right to express one’s opinions without censorship, restraint, or legal penalty. Or as often adopted, you can get away with it if you don’t break a law?
Common definition:
Someone who argues a point isn’t trolling.
Someone who makes a wild and unwarranted comment about that person’s is trolling.
Someone who brings something off topic into the conversation in order to make that person mad is trolling.
Trolling – (verb), as it relates to internet, is the deliberate act, (by a Troll – noun or adjective), of making random unsolicited and/or controversial comments on various internet forums with the intent to provoke an emotional knee jerk reaction from unsuspecting readers to engage in a fight or argument.
Or are we talking cyberbullying;
The use of electronic communication to bully a person, typically by sending messages of an intimidating or threatening nature.
One thing I hope the debate teases out is that trolling and defamation are two entirely different things.
Defamation is unsubstantiated commentary.
Should someone defame you on line, they open the publisher up to legal threat as, in the eyes of the law, the publisher carries the legal risk, not the person who wrote the comment – therefore whether they use a real profile or not is largely irrelevant to this matter.
Therefore, you should contact the publisher, link them to the comment, explain why it is defamatory, and ask them to remove it.
You should also do the same for any trolling comments as trolling creates an unpleasant environment and puts others off posting.
The fact is that trolling and defamatory commentary can be dealt with via responsible moderation.
This is one of the reasons I dislike facebook and youtube. People and group admins control their own moderation and it’s virtually impossible to get any trolling or defamatory commentary taken down. However, on stand-alone sites, I’ve never had a problem and moderators/admins have always been happy to assist me.
Ironically, one of the main reasons I have been trolled is due to Property Tribes extremely good moderation. People cannot use legal means to get commentary removed, because it is substantiated (via links, screenshots, verification by moderator etc), so they resort to dirty tactics, and one of those is to attack on me to discredit Property Tribes – even thought it is community-generated content, not personal content by me.
Sorry, Vanessa Warwick. No trolling meant, but I had to Google who you were. It appears Vanessa, in the search results which appeared, you too have been accused, for what you claim in your post above, your site does not permit? All be it, you do so in name.
Thanks for your unsubstantiated comment – the perfect example of trolling.
If you found such results, then why didn’t you provide a link to them?
One trait of trolling is to make vague references to something to muddy the waters so that the person cannot defend themselves and this in terms casts aspersions on someone – just as you have done – so thank you for so ably illustrating my point.
Such comments force people to fight a mist – something they cannot see. A great disruption tactic, which is another attribute of a troll as they love to de-rail debates and invoke emotional responses.
I don’t troll anyone. I will make a legitimate challenge to their claims – and that is NOT trolling.
Vanessa. I did attempt to share links, but the modrators on this site have removed them. Not sure why.
Okay, so what were the links and who wrote them?I will hazard a guess that they are actually links to me being trolled. There’s a few of those about due to certain quarters of the property industry not liking the service that Property Tribes provides to the public.That you have fallen for them shows either a lack of knowledge of what goes on and who the writers are and what their agenda is, or that you are part of those quarters and trying to discredit me. You seem to care a lot about this topic, so it’s probably the latter but you can be clear about your agenda by transparency, just as I can.Either way, I have nothing to hide and I will fact check all lies made about me.If EYE does not allow substantiation links, then that is a problem. However, you can send your links to me at vanessawarwick (at) icloud.com and I will review them and I will report back here. But then of course, you will have to reveal who you are by your email address, so I doubt I’ll hear from you.
The irony of course would be if this story gets royally trolled !
Here’s the real irony Simon. Perhaps you can examine the gossamer thin line between anonymous trolling and vexatious, site sponsored, clickbait
Here’s an example of what I’m referring to; embarrassing, ill-mannered and unnessceary
“Rummage 4 – CEO vacancy since ‘unknown but quite a while ago’ – Anthony Codling exits almost as quickly as he started and very quietly. Is it because to all extents and purposes Robert May’s project is still that – an academic endeavour that is unable to be utilised commercially? Codling took quite a reputational risk backing what amounts to the equivalent of a school chemistry set in a shed, and seems not to have ventured back to the City accordingly, preferring his own start-up to distract attention for a while.
This business doesn’t need a CEO – it needs a vet to put it out of its misery.
Upside – Hard to think of any. Downside – it’s all downside for a product that the founder seems unable to articulate to the market. Score 0/10″
That is shocking Robert. Where was that written?Please seem my comment below. You should have been able to get that removed. If it was a stand-alone site, they would have terms and conditions of use, and that almost certainly breached their T & C’s.
https://v3.propertyindustryeye.com/very-vacant-the-vacuum-at-the-top-of-the-industrys-significant-companies-part-2/
eeekk, awkward.
The more embarrassinging thing about that was Eye was asked that rummage4 didn’t feature in Quirk’s resentful and unprofessional swipe at anyone who wouldn’t consider him a suitable candidate for the various CEO roles vacant at the time
That’s brilliant! The biggest troll gets to sit on a panel to berate the other trolls. A bit like Jesus at The Last Supper.
Come on Chip, you know there are no accidents in life , with the possible exception of Wee Jimmy Krankee
Is that Iain’s nom de plume? The panel now makes complete sense.