The question came up in a private discussion that noted troll Kevin Weinberg, aka Paro(gar), might have scrubbed his Twitter feed- again- in an effort to cover his tracks.  Scroling through I couldn't say for sure since I don't follow him or anything, but I did discover this little gem:

I really can't wait to see this one.  ;P

If you're unfamiliar with the story, former baseball pitcher Curt Schilling recently tweeted about his daughter getting into college, as any proud papa would.  The trolling that ensued ranged from 'good-natured ragging' to borderline stalking and sexual harassment but definitely cyber-bullying .

Schilling, however, not only refused to take it all lying down, he came back like Bruce Lee with a set of triple nunchucks, outing two of the most egregious knuckleheads in the process.

https://38pitches.wordpress.com/2015/03/01/the-world-we-live-in-man-has-it-changed/

I was never much of a fan of his during his playing days, and he's the first to admit he's done plenty of bonehead things on his own and is extremely thankful he didn't grow up in the Internet Age for just those reasons.  But I always give credit when it's due, and Curt Schilling did his thing here- as a father and a man.  Good job, sir.

Testing Limitations - Jaq D. Hawkins

This has never existed as a book. It was placed on Goodreads to flush out the trolls who were one starring books just to game the system, downvoting authors from a list for the sake of pure nastiness.

Someone was a big enough loser to transfer it here, where this kind of game playing shouldn't exist.

[I realized after I reblogged an interesting post purposing silence in the face of Badly Behaving Authors, that it could be assumed that I agree with it, which isn't exactly true. I reblog, retweet and share things on social media that make me think or I think others will find interesting. I don't necessarily agree or endorse the ideas contained with in, and in this instance I do not agree.] 

Here’s my two cents.

The silent treatment, is not unlike the idea of “don’t feed the troll,” in that it assumes that if you ignore something it will disappear or fade away. In the case of harassment, and abuse this is quite the opposite. 

Silence is the absence of sound, and in this case its the absence of taking responsibility for your actions. If a troll is met with no resistance, or repercussions for their behavior do they learn anything? Yes, that no one will stand against them. If they shout loud enough, badger enough or use enough degrading language they win. 

This is no different with an author who feels justified in harassing, or recruiting readers/fans/followers to harass other people on their behalf. That’s what this is about, harassment trolling of reviewers and readers for not only daring to not like an author’s work, but to post their opinions in a public venue. 

See this isn’t just about you avoiding an undesirable book, or obnoxious author. It’s not just about GoodReads policing your shelves, or deleting reviews. It’s about the complete lack of protection for readers posting book reviews online. 

Where authors will huge fan followings can direct an barrage of hate at one lone reviewer for daring to having an opinion. Where that reader is harassed on multiple social networking platforms, called names and vilified. Where even the social networks like GoodReads, Facebook, and Twitter give readers/reviewers no protection from this kind of harassment, but deletes reviews to protect authors. 

Where does a reader go? How does silence help them?

I understand the idea of not giving authors like this attention, or sales, but understand people who buy books based on these kind on controversy, are buying it because of the author’s detestable behavior. A voice of decent is no different to them than silence, but think of the readers that could be reached if you speak up. Think of the readers you could save from wasting money on a bad book, or the authors who will think twice before lashing out against a reviewer. 

Let’s be clear, this isn’t about punishing Badly Behaving Authors, it’s about protecting readers and reviewers. It’s about doing what GoodReads, and other social network sites, refuse to do. Ensuring that we’re all able to post our book reviews without fear of harassment and abuse. 

Here’s a great TedTalk that Steph Guthrie did on Misogynist Trolling, that really changed my mind on being silent when others are being harassed. The Problem with “Don’t Feed the Trolls.” 

I had to delete comments for the first time on my Booklikes blog today.

I don't usually delete comments. I like to keep examples of trolling to show others and it's amusing to watching someone dig a hole for themselves while attempting to harass me.

However, today someone tried to use my comments to argue in favor of racism and tried to compare speaking out against racism and sexism to censoring other people's free speech. No joke.

These types of arguments play on the perception a lot of racist bigots have that they are the victims. That people use words like "racist" and "bigot" to pick on them for saying racists things that they believe everyone else is thinking. They really believe that everyone else (or a large majority of people) are racist, but are too scared to admit it openly. They may even pretend to not be racist, but argue that racism is a fact of life and to argue against it is futile, petty and abusive. 

Because they believe it is fear, not recognition that racism is wrong, that keeps the masses silent, they blame people who speak out against racism for being bullies.

After all, "everyone has a right to their own opinions, even racists, misogynist, and homophobes." Of course when it comes time to talk about how those "opinions" support oppression and prejudice, they refuse to take any responsibility for it. Claiming "that's just how the world works. [cue the apathetic shrug]"

This convoluted kind of non-logic seeks to excuse racists, and normalize racism. While vilifying anyone who dares point out or challenge it. It's like punishing the person who points out that someone peed in the coffeepot, rather than holding the person who did the peeing responsible for their actions.

I'm very familiar with these arguments and obviously not afraid to talk about them.

I chose to delete these comments because I refuse to allow anyone to use my blog like a megaphone to spout racists propaganda.

See this is a clever type of Trolling that hijacks the comments section in order to use another person's website to get a larger audience, i.e. your followers, to listen to them.

It doesn't matter how you respond, their comments will always come back to supporting their agenda. Because they're not actually talking to you, they're talking to the supporters they believe are out there watching. They want to show off for them, to prove that they are right.

They will keep talking/commenting until you take that platform away. That's what they mean when they say don't feed the trolls. 

This is why people of color say we are not responsible for educating other people about racism. Because people like this don't want to be educated, they want to argue that racism is real, or that it isn't their fault. They want to pretend its just a harmless opinions, that they have a right to have and express without taking responsibility for how it affects others.

They do it to further convince themselves and others watching that racism is not only normal, but an inalienable right to be protected. 

Beware of this kind of troll, and never hesitate to delete comments if you do not want them on your blog.

It's your space, and your right to dictate what or who are allowed in it.