 
 
 

 none
Problematic behaviour of certain user RRS feed

Answers

  • Do what I've done, mark all of its posts as spam and mention that it's a known banned user.

    That troll has been a huge problem for me in the past and that's what I've always done to get rid of it (until it makes a new account that is).

    You can also send in an email to fissues (at) microsoft [dot] com with those links and they can take care of getting rid of the troll for the time being.


    • Proposed as answer by Naomi N Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:26 PM
    • Marked as answer by cheong00 Thursday, October 6, 2016 1:20 AM
    Wednesday, October 5, 2016 12:12 PM

All replies

  • Do what I've done, mark all of its posts as spam and mention that it's a known banned user.

    That troll has been a huge problem for me in the past and that's what I've always done to get rid of it (until it makes a new account that is).

    You can also send in an email to fissues (at) microsoft [dot] com with those links and they can take care of getting rid of the troll for the time being.


    • Proposed as answer by Naomi N Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:26 PM
    • Marked as answer by cheong00 Thursday, October 6, 2016 1:20 AM
    Wednesday, October 5, 2016 12:12 PM
  • I read that particular discussion (only the first one) and I think it was somewhat educational and thought provoking. I didn't read the other two. Based on the first one only I'd say, let it be - at least it led to some investigation and discussion that is not completely wasted (I read it with some interest).

    For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Becker's Law


    My blog


    My TechNet articles

    Wednesday, October 5, 2016 1:36 PM
  • The main problem with ritehereXX (or whatever it calls itself this time around) is that the troll is incapable of having a discussion without devolving into name calling and personal attacks. It will ALWAYS happen, even if not right at the outset.

    Wednesday, October 5, 2016 2:04 PM
  • I guess I'll try to mark some of them as inappropiate, but marking all is a bit over.

    IMO, providing wrong information is not necessarily a big issue here as long as you really believe the answer you provided is correct at the time. I think I've gave some poor advice in the past due to some misunderstanding on how things work too. It's just "insist the answer I provided is correct even if prove is given that his answer is wrong" part that should be marked as inappropiate content.

    Thursday, October 6, 2016 1:29 AM
  • Generally I agree with you. This troll is different though, because it just can't help its trollish ways. I've literally had problems with this same troll since 2013/14 (and it's been around well before I even started frequenting these forums), so I know there won't be any significant behavior change in the long run.

    I've been waiting for another outburst in the PowerShell forum. I've only had to delete a few posts made by this troll up until now, but sooner or later it'll explode in personal attacks and it'll need to be banned again. It's just a matter of time really.


    Thursday, October 6, 2016 1:41 AM
  • So it happens that he posts a few new posts today just to irritate me. I have to agree with you that maybe just banning him right in the beginning will save everyone's time.
    • Edited by cheong00 Thursday, October 6, 2016 7:07 AM
    Thursday, October 6, 2016 7:05 AM
  • In the past the forum admins have complained when I marked many posts as abusive. They get so many alerts that they lose track. They asked that I mark just one post abusive per user, then they review the account, and if appropriate they ban the user (which deletes all of their posts in bulk at once).

    However, this situation is a bit different, as some of the posts are actually reasonable. Still, if the forum admins do there job, they should review all of the recent activity when they get an alert that a post has been reported abusive. But sometimes the abusive report feature is used to alert moderators to move a post, so the forum admins probably ignore many reports. My hope is that when you select "spam/advertising" they don't leave it up to moderators.


    Richard Mueller - MVP Enterprise Mobility (Identity and Access)

    Thursday, October 6, 2016 1:59 PM
  • The way I look at it is that a known banned user (banned at least 50 times by my count) is by definition spamming when they post with a new burner account.

    I've left the current account alone, since it has actually been better behaved than in the past, but I have no doubt it'll end up being banned again eventually.


    • Proposed as answer by Naomi N Thursday, October 6, 2016 2:06 PM
    Thursday, October 6, 2016 2:04 PM
https://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/4b78dcc1-1145-4005-8f01-e6df830b55c7/problematic-behaviour-of-certain-user?forum=reportabug
social.microsoft.com
crawl=CC-MAIN-2021-31
86998
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:IFXHYRIGJ2DMPCUEMN53NWUJR5QRORHX
<urn:uuid:0e127947-16d4-4ebe-bcf9-ffd77fc14c4c>
2021-08-05T15:51:27Z
104.109.156.40
application/xhtml+xml
sha1:VTSL2UPE64FPF3PE25IVMLKN6C7TX6LJ
<urn:uuid:792c3996-056e-4d9c-9b59-a523ea8c8ab7>
https://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/4b78dcc1-1145-4005-8f01-e6df830b55c7/problematic-behaviour-of-certain-user?forum=reportabug
response
<urn:uuid:c2d78b31-b933-4fb3-a6f6-8744361f5ee3>
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2021-31
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for July/August 2021
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-67-67-198.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.18 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 1.2-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: https://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/