Killfile!

"it looks like it would be easy to edit to zap comments by anyone (even "PZ Myers")."

Finally, I can read Pharyngula without having to read anything by PZ Myers!

Unfortunately, it would only knock out my comments, and not the articles.

It would be fairly easy to get around it, though, by doing MrX1, MrX2, MrX3 etc etc...

PZ,

This is a non sequitur, but that was the advantage at your old website, where we had to register before we could comment. My guess is there were fewer nanos and JMcHs to deal with back then.

Any chance of bringing that back?

(I wish I'd been able to comment yesterday, but I was too busy worshipping at the Church of the Broken Nissan Water Pump to even approach a computer. From one who's been there and back again, good job, PZ.)

so, if you killfile yourself, does the world implode? since i am the most annoying commenter on my own blog, maybe i should try this experiment and see what happens. hrm.

I wish I'd been able to comment yesterday, but I was too busy worshipping at the Church of the Broken Nissan Water Pump to even approach a computer.

Bwwaahahaa! Silly heathen! See what you get by worshipping false idols? I worship at the Holy House of Honda (ommmmmK20Zthreeeeee) and our god never fails us!

Okay, silliness aside (and genuinely sorry for your engine trouble), this is a neat feature, but I'd be interested in using it to comb the comments for specific commenters. Anyone know if there'd be an easy way to invert it, to exclude all comments but those on a whitelist?

(Nervous grin) You do realise I'm only joking, don't you? I mean, surely you can see my comments are just a bit of harmless fun. You can see that can't you? (Falls to knees, sobbing) Please! Please don't zap me! I don't want to be a test subject for the idiot zapping death rays of your army of undead squid men!

Aw. Well, you know, if you can't answer my posts, PZ, I guess this is the way to go.[/gratuitous taunting]

Seriously, though, if you don't want to see (and answer) my posts, why don't you just delete them?

rrt:
My JS is pretty bad, but I'd guess that if you modify the line
if(troll.test(comments[j].innerHTML)) {
to read
if(! troll.test(comments[j].innerHTML)) {
it should remove all of the comments not containing the word JMcH.

You reap what you sow, JMcH. If you'd contributed anything worth responding to, even critically, you wouldn't be so derided. Mere trolling impresses no one.

I was interested in such a thing back in the day when King Tard Charlie Wagner was babbling on every thread.

i like trolling for Yellowtail.

did you know they're not actually tuna?

"Unfortunately, it would only knock out my comments, and not the articles."

arg. my dream of daily viewing nothing but your random quote has been dashed!

FhnuZoag:

In which case you simply change the troll variable to:

var troll = new RegExp("MrX[0-9][0-9]?");

It might be nice to modify the script to indicate that a comment has been expunged. Something like "Boneheaded comment by XXX removed". If I get a change tonight, I'll see what I can do.

I was interested in such a thing back in the day when King Tard Charlie Wagner was babbling on every thread.

Posted by: steve s

Yeah but then I wouldn't have the pleasure of reading your patently dry retorts, steve.

Even if I am objectively funnier than you. ;)

FhnuZoag:

It would be fairly easy to get around it, though, by doing MrX1, MrX2, MrX3 etc etc...

I'd argue that when someone's deliberately trying to get around a killfile, that constitutes abusive behavior to the point of bannability. People who are sincere in their beliefs interpret being ignored as a sort of personal validation, and are content to declare victory over the close-minded heathens, as with JMcH above.

(On rare occasions it might be interpreted as cause for self-reflection, but that sort of humility is pretty uncommon amongst those of us who're arrogant enough to think our opinions are worth posting to the Intarweb!)

Only genuine trolls (in the classical sense of people who post just to disrupt or get attention) have any interest in evading a killfile, at which point more severe measures are legitimate.

If you're going to modify it, it would also be nice if it supported a list of killed IDs.

Not that I'll ever get to use it -- as the host here, it is my privilege and obligation to skim through every single comment posted here. (cue violins.)

I never thought I'd get to use this:

"If you meet the Buddha on the Internet, put him in your killfile!"

Seriously, though, if you don't want to see (and answer) my posts, why don't you just delete them?

Or, alternately, you could go away and quit being a shithead. That would solve the problem, too.

Hey, PZ! Let me give you some advice. Jinx McHue ("JMcH") used to be a regular dumbfuck commenter on my site as well, constantly whinging on about how he knew so much more than me about Christianity and the Bible. (BTW, he doesn't. He's appallingly ignorant of the absolute basics of his own religion but ... onward.)

So, one day, I laid down a challenge. I was not going to allow him to comment anymore until he answered a question with a simple "Yes" or "No" answer. The question? "Do you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments?"

I've never heard from him since.

CC

This is the beauty of Firefox and Greasemonkey, users can do useful things that website maintainers can't or won't. Does Greasemonkey still put that incredibly ugly icon on your status bar?

It appears a monkey head does appear in the status bar. But a cartoon monkey is less annoying than the alternative.

Ok, don't tell my boss, but I modified the script a bit. I'll post it here. I fixed what I think is a bug. This version only tests the comment footer for the name. Without this, comments that contain the name get removed which ain't good for people that use a common word for a user name (like I do).

Secondly, it now replaces the offending comment with the words "Dumb comment removed" and leaves the footer intact. Lastly, the comment uses PZ's Monty Python idiot guy as the background. That last one is because I really like that background image and it seems appropriate.

I agree that support for real lists of people would be cool, but this is my first Greasemonkey script, so that is beyond my meager skills at this point.

Personally I like it when people like that post, unless they are being completely disruptive.

Nobody is going to read their crap and change their mind if they previously thought differently than them... and nobody on the fence is going to think "well, they've convinced me!"

You're going to get a few like-minded idiots who read it and agree - but they already are lost... and you may get a few people who have used some of the same arguments before out of habit or unthinking reflex, and now when faced with it might think "oh shit - is THAT what I sound like?"

Let people expose themselves for what they really are, I say.

I wonder how they caught the guy. Did he have any prior contact with the victim?

Woah. How did I get to this thread?

I entered only my name, and I get a message about needing my e-mail address, and then I click OK and it sends me here, to a different post? I'm not sure, but that could be a bug.

To add new posters to the script, change the line at the top of the script as follows:

var troll = new RegExp("(JMcH|pdf23ds)");

This added the poster 'pdf23ds' to the list (just for illustration and testing purposes). You can add as many as you like,separated by '|'. Enjoy!

You reap what you sow, JMcH. If you'd contributed anything worth responding to, even critically, you wouldn't be so derided. Mere trolling impresses no one.

I have raised legitimate points. You ignore them by cowardly hiding behind the "troll" condemnation.

Or, alternately, you could go away and quit being a shithead. That would solve the problem, too.

So you'd prefer an echo chamber. Then why does PZ bother to have open comments here? Require people to register. Delete posts you don't like.

Of course, that's not what you want. You want open comments to draw in people like me so you can sit back and mindlessly condemn them as "trolls" and "shitheads" instead of going to their websites and blogs to be trolls and shitheads yourselves.

So, one day, I laid down a challenge. I was not going to allow him to comment anymore until he answered a question with a simple "Yes" or "No" answer. The question? "Do you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments?"

"Simple." Nothing you write is simple, CC. You add all sorts of swears and pointless rhetoric. Then, when someone responds, you move goalposts and call them names without ever having anything worthwhile to say.

I did answer your question, however. You just chose to delete my answer. Thanks for proving yourself to be a liar once again.

I've never heard from him since.

So you think.

"I did answer your question, however."

Just to really show what a great guy you are JMcH, answer it again here.

YES or NO

That will show him...

Of course, that's not what you want. You want open comments to draw in people like me so you can sit back and mindlessly condemn them as "trolls" and "shitheads" instead of going to their websites and blogs to be trolls and shitheads yourselves.

Don't flatter yourself, 'Jinx'. There are plenty of people with divergent opinions here. There's a difference between merely having a divergent opinion and being an annoying shithead. You chose to be the latter long ago.

So, Jinxy-boy, DO you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments? We need to hear your answer.

JMcH: Of course, that's not what you want. You want open comments to draw in people like me so you can sit back and mindlessly condemn them as "trolls" and "shitheads" instead of going to their websites and blogs to be trolls and shitheads yourselves.

You say that like we're being cowardly by not being assholes...

"You say that like we're being cowardly by not being assholes..."

In school they used to say it like "What, you don't want to fight back? What are you, a pussy?"

Using this plugin will manage to excise the original comment, but the most trolly trolls tend to generate replies, and those replies, for someone who's killfiling the troll, will most likely be considered noise to. So it's not a complete solution.

However, the behavior of hiding any comment that mentions the killfiled poster is probably not a bad idea.

All I know is that since I installed the (modified) script, all I see for Mr. McShithead up there are three "Dumb comment removed" sentences in a row.

Sold!

What would be nice is to have troll comments hidden with the option to show them, as is now done with all comments by default on daily Kos, or show the troll comment but with all the vowels removed (with a button to restore them)

Also, it'd be nice to have a cross-blog-implementation version, that'd handle comments all over. I know that it'd be appreciated over at Making Light, although there the host does a pretty good job of disemvoweling/deleting the worst stuff.

Hrm. This blog killfile is such a neat idea that I may finally have to sit down and learn how to write greasemonkey scripts.

I have raised legitimate points. You ignore them by cowardly "troll" condemnation.

Jesus McH. Christ.

You're the big cowardly ignorer of questions here. You are exactly a turd-in-the-punchbowl troll.

Please, answer the question about inerrancy, without waffling, or piss off.

(And then maybe you can answer some other questions you've been avoiding, e.g., about substitutional punishment, as in the earlier "Good Thing We're Moving to Faith-based Initiatives, Huh?" thread. http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/04/good_thing_were_moving_to_fa… )

It occurs to me, there's another key factor distinguishing a Classic Troll from a mere person with different opinions: trolls only participate in threads where they can provoke people in their trademarked way. JMcH/Jinx's shtick is baiting liberals and atheists, so he only posts in threads where he can provoke those two groups -- threads with an explicit political or religious subject matter. Notice that if it's more of a straight science thread, Jinx has nothing at all to say, so he doesn't bother (unless it's to do an occasional snide anti-evolution driveby). If there's no way to fit in his 'culture wars' angle, he's nowhere to be found. Most of the other really irritating trolls here don't bother with the science threads, either.

speaking of undead squid men, did anyone see the posters for the next installment of "Pirates of the Carribean", notably the Davy Jones character, per

http://disney.go.com/disneypictures/pirates/

Boy, for killfiling me, I'm sure getting a lot of hits from here still...

Ekzept: Way ahead of you.

JMcH: You're making me rethink my policy of not banning people for being deeply stupid.

Oh, by the way: I do ban spammers without hesitation. Don't risk giving me the idea that you're only posting here to troll for traffic to your pathetic blog.

I thought you had me killfiled, PZ. How can you be responding to my posts?

Hey, Jinx, do you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments?

Oh, by the way: I do ban spammers without hesitation. Don't risk giving me the idea that you're only posting here to troll for traffic to your pathetic blog.

It was a tongue-in-cheek observation, PZ. I'm not here to draw traffic to my blog, though I must be honest and admit that is a bonus.

Like I said, you're making me rethink my policy on allowable lower IQ limits for commenters.

Not that I'll ever get to use it -- as the host here, it is my privilege and obligation to skim through every single comment posted here.

You must be >this< high to comment here, and you just aren't reaching the bar.

JMcH: If you read what PZ said (down in the comments), he can't use this - because he has to read all comments, just in case someone he would killfile starts, say, spamming.

So if he gains anything from this, it's by cutting down on the number of responses troll-type people get, by enabling others to simply ignore them.

Aw heck.

I don't really mind the occasional troll, so long as they don't settle in so thick that they hurt property values. They serve to keep the blood well riled, and not infrequently some good, entertaining, even profound comments are thusly proffered in reply.

But that said, meseems that Mr. Jinx McH truly is quite the persistent bone(or whatever)head.

Oh well. sometimes it takes a crank to turn the wheel . . .

So, one day, I laid down a challenge. I was not going to allow him to comment anymore until he answered a question with a simple "Yes" or "No" answer. The question? "Do you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments?"
-CC

Just to really show what a great guy you are JMcH, answer it again here.

YES or NO
-Jason

So, Jinxy-boy, DO you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments? We need to hear your answer.
-george cauldron

Please, answer the question about inerrancy, without waffling, or piss off.

(And then maybe you can answer some other questions you've been avoiding, e.g., about substitutional punishment, as in the earlier "Good Thing We're Moving to Faith-based Initiatives, Huh?" thread.
-Paul W.

Hey, Jinx, do you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments?
-george cauldron

Y'know...I'm pretty sure I didn't see you respond to these, JMcH! Man, it's a good thing I caught that oversight for you. I mean, you might've ended up looking bad.

So...JMcH. Do you believe the Old Testament and New Testament are absolutely inerrant? (or did I already miss my chance to engage you in thoughtful, enlightening conversation via this forum?)
-me

Damn man, if you're going to troll for hits, why not do something useful with them? At least put up an ad banner, or maybe link to an Amazon wishlist or something. This reminds me a little of the Wagnerian inquisition and that one mechanical engineering grad student from back when (who was like, totally going to sue everyone). Who sits around gaining self-esteem by watching their hit counter all night? Really man... that's just weird.

A little help requested--I think this script is just pure genius and am trying to use it to eliminate annoying trolls on other sites too. But it doesn't seem to work, even when I enable other sites in the little Greasemonkey dialogue box. What should I do?

MikeM - some of nano's comments were useful and interesting. There were some other issues floating around there, but essentially he misread the intent in PZ's post - which probably says something useful about how people percieve the things we say. He certainly wasn't being a troll or even being uncivil.

I just got the killfile working. Installed fine, no troubles, ready from the get-go. "Reclamation! Joy before the angels of God! The point is that it works!"

Using this plugin will manage to excise the original comment, but the most trolly trolls tend to generate replies, and those replies, for someone who's killfiling the troll, will most likely be considered noise to. So it's not a complete solution.

Is there a way to set it to search the body, not just the 'posted by:' bit? Because most of the responses will mention the name of the person they're quoting/responding to, and I'd imagine that having it search for and kill any comment with JMcH ANYWHERE in the comment would kill the vast majority of those threads responding to him...

Like I said, you're making me rethink my policy on allowable lower IQ limits for commenters.

Mine's in the low 150s. Is that high enough for me to be allowed to comment here?

Okay, pretend I'm something other than completely stupid and actually got the tags around that first paragraph in my comment right, 'kay?

Mine's in the low 150s. Is that high enough for me to be allowed to comment here?

I'm not sure. Is selective blindness and inability to comprehend Yes/No queries an indicator of inadequate IQ?

Hey Jinxy! Do you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments?

Why won't you answer? Ashamed, or something?

Denying your faith???

"Jinxy Boy" (lol) will not answer the inerrancy question because by giving a concrete answer will make him vulnerable to all the valid points and well thought logic he wishes would go away and leave him alone. He could not handle the results of picking either "yes" or "no". It is easier for him to play loose and fast with the facts and then run away from arguments which he can't handle.

He is hollow and unsubstantial.

Dr. Myers --
Nobody likes a troll, but I really think that one glaring difference between the right-wing and left-wing blogworlds is the pronounced tolerance of the latter. Many of the larger rightie sites don't even allow comments; many others are very quick to block anyone who criticizes orthodoxy. I can understand how a "JMcH" can be an annoyance, but in time, most people learn to just scroll past habitual trolls. Don't let him erode one of our greatest virtues.

Actually, I got Jinxy the Troll to fess up to this on another thread here:

"do you believe in the absolute inerrancy of both the Old and New Testaments?"

Not that it has to do with anything other than CanadianCrackpot's ego and vanity, but yes, I do. Now please respond with the typical skeptic's misrepresentation of inerrancy.

So I lobbed a few subsequent questions at him. We'll see how long it takes him to clam up.

If you can't get rid of these people, at least you can make them uncomfortable.

George,

In which thread did this miracle occur?

At the 'I'll take anger over sleaze any day' thread. Come check it out.

chuko,

I actually kind of enjoy reading Jinx's comments, but probably not for the reason he intended. It's a lot like watching a bad movie; you just can't stop yourself.

I think think that if he were required to register, he might be a little less likely to turn himself into a walking, talking version of "Plan 9 From Outer Space."

Before you come after me, too, Jinx, I'd like to point out that I'm one of the many who've been there and back. I was a Christian, too. I now think one of the best things you can do to cloud the minds of students is to distract them with religion.

I'm waiting for you to comment on other myths, like Buddhism or the FSM (one an ancient myth, the other a humorous, recent myth). I'm only waiting because, according to you, PZ isn't supposed to comment on religion because he's not an expert, but I bet you have nothing but contempt for Buddhism, regardless of your level of expertise in the area.

That may seem like baiting, but seriously, I bet you reject something you're not an expert on either.

Keep the great comments coming, Bella.

Now please respond with the typical skeptic's misrepresentation of inerrancy.

Hm. Is this like debating what the definition of "is" is?

Argh. And once again we prove one of my personal maxims: "Those who do not remember usenet are doomed to reimplement it, badly."

15 years ago, any half-assed Usenet newsreader could killfile not only a given annoying user, but also all responses to him/her and any sub-threads spawned by the troll. Now, thanks to the combined efforts of the many geniuses of the Open Source Movement(tm) we have client-side plugin javascript hacks that can implement 5% of the functionality, using only 200 times as much memory and cpu time! Advantage: blogosphere?

(Don't mind me, I'm just an embittered geek.)

It works! Another plug in the sewer of trolldom!

"Now please respond with the typical skeptic's misrepresentation of inerrancy."

Inerrancy: Freedom from error or untruths.

If that is the case (that the Bible is totally true and inerrant), then God is a bastard. Even if he did exist, i would not worship that cretin. I, and most people I know are more moral (and less hypocritical) than that git.

Killing first born children...slavery...stoning unruly sons to death...EVIL!

I tried to add other names for maximum killfileness and I ran into the problem that it was only killfiling the last name on the list. So when I added "Commissar", it didn't killfile JmHC. Does anyone have any idea what modification I should be doing aside from copying the line with the troll's name and substituting the name of another troll, which I've already done? I assume there's something in the script which tells it that there's only one person to killfile, but I can't find it.

For the moment, I'm returning it to its original state, because I'd much rather have the major idiot killfiled than a more minor annoyance.

Nullifidian, I assume that if you're duplicating the entire lines that set the variable, each new line resets the variable to a new value. See bPer's comment upthread on how to make a list of handles.

Jason,

You may have fallen into a trap there, giving JMcH what he asked for---and an opening to say how you're wrong about what inerrancy means or implies, without actually saying what he thinks it does mean or imply.

There was some byplay about this in another thread, and we're waiting for JMcH to answer the question about what he means by inerrancy, if it's not what we "misrepresent" it as.

(Presumably, JMcH would disagree with either your definition, or your inference about God being an immoral, hypocritical git, or both.)

JMcH,

To repeat the question,

In what sense(s) and in what respect(s) is the Bible inerrant? In what sense(s) and in what respect(s) is the Bible fallible?

We actually want to know what you think, for once, and we don't want to misrepresent you.

Please ignore Jason's definition and inferences if you don't like them.

"Please ignore Jason's definition and inferences if you don't like them."

That isn't my definition. I looked it up on dictionary.com so it would be as "neutral" as possible. It even used the example of "inerrancy of the Bible". If he has another definition for it, I would love to see it.

It is probably something like "even when it's wrong, it's right", which is par for "their course". :/ Ah well, consider me trapped then.

Well, as an Opera user, I guess I don't get to play with the new toy.
[Herman Munster voice]
Darn darn darn darn DARN DARN!!!
[/Herman Munster voice]

Still, it doesn't require much in the way of expertise to differentiate between someone engaging in substantive discussion and trollish behavior, and based on the sample so far, I'd classify Jinx as a genyoowine troll.

They do have a few uses. They're entertaining, in a shuddery "I'm so glad I wasn't in that wrecked car" sort of way, and when I'm surfing the 'net in the morning trying to get enough caffeine into my system to enable me to drive to work, the blood pressure boost comes in handy.

Sometimes they even help me achieve the state of pre-psychotic rage without which one cannot function in a recording studio.

Ktesibios: Apparently, Opera is able to run (some) Greasemonkey scripts. Details can be found here:
http://www.opera.com/support/tutorials/userjs/examples/

I don't have a copy of Opera to play with, so I can verify nothing.

Jason,

I have no problem with your definition, or your conclusions; sorry if I sounded dismissive. It's just that some of us were trying to give JMcH a bit of slack (rope?) to express his views with no possibility of his being "misrepresented" and whining about the "unfair" treatment by the modern libreral echo chamber here.

But shockingly, JMcH has wimped out and demonstrated himself to be an utter hypocrite about open discourse, refusing to answer repeated direct questions about his "misrepresented" views.

Apparently he prefers to keep his actual views a secret, so he can play the poor, misunderstood victim and take cheap shots at P.Z. et al.

Surprise, surprise.

I wonder why it isn't a feature of blogs for them to have their own sort of killfile mechanism, using cookies. There could be a little "ignore" button next to each post which the user could click to ignore posts from that commenter. Most of the forums I read have that sort of feature.

"I have no problem with your definition, or your conclusions; sorry if I sounded dismissive. It's just that some of us were trying to give JMcH a bit of slack (rope?) to express his views with no possibility of his being "misrepresented" and whining about the "unfair" treatment by the modern libreral echo chamber here."

I kinda figured as much. No apologies needed. :)

Killfiles? Blogs don't even have threading! They certainly don't let me use my newsreader-of-choice with them. And as for showing you only the comments you haven't already read, you know, like newsreaders have since, oh, 1982... fat chance.

(There's a *reason* I hardly ever comment. Usenet is just so much better designed for discussions than the blogosphere that it's not true.)