Natural and legal rights are two types of rights. Legal rights are those bestowed onto a person by a given legal system. Natural rights are those not contingent upon the laws, customs, or beliefs of any particular culture or government, and therefore universal and inalienable (i.e., rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws).

The idea of human rights is also closely related to that of natural rights: some acknowledge no difference between the two, regarding them as synonymous, while others choose to keep the terms separate to eliminate association with some features traditionally associated with natural rights.[3] Natural rights, in particular, are considered beyond the authority of any government or international body <or ChessGames online community> to dismiss or diminish by way of kibitzing brake.

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy <freedom of speech> and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

The 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights is an important legal instrument enshrining one conception of natural rights into international soft law.

But to me there is no substitute for the hard work of going through forums (even the ones that probably feel like wading through a stagnant, putrid, mutant-mosquito-infested swamp) and reading what who is saying to whom.

As I said, a lot of hard work. And given your (understandable) concerns about delegating power to users, you would have to do *all* of it yourselves.

Unfortunately, when all the technology has been tried and failed to control abuse by trolls, and the users are proposing forming lynch mobs, there is only one thing to do. We all know what it is. We know it is now necessary; this site faces a crisis, and no mistake.

But I don't think this has to be as bad as it sounds. The reason I say this is that it really won't take that long to learn what you need to know. There are only a few predictable spots where trolling and confrontation regularly and predictably occur: You probably think of them as the swamps.

So, good. Become swamp rangers. Guide unsuspecting newcomers around the quicksand; prepare them for the mutant mosquitoes.

And then go forth on your daily rounds, and set right what needs it. You may have to kill some particularly pestilential mosquitoes. But it needn't be many; just enough to discourage the others.

<Kenneth Rogoff> Swampland State Park and <Wesley So> Wetlands Wilderness are counting on you.

If you receive a message like the one illustrated below that means you are among a handful of people with an extraordinary number of ignores relative to your time on the site and the number of posts you have made:

http://imgur.com/BrSsNzA

To help the system work more efficiently, we encourage everybody as always to ignore people who are posting offensive or non-productive kibitzes.

Without revealing the details of the math, it works like this: we calculate an expected number of ignores that your account should have received, based on the time you've been here and the number of posts you've made. Then we look at the actual number of ignores (weighted in a certain fashion) and compute the ratio.

That ratio is your Probability of Initiating Trolling Activity (PITA), and if it's over 100, you are placed on Restricted Kibitzing until it comes back down. That is an extremely high threshold that currently only affects four members of this site. We may modify that threshold in the future.

It would be possible, but there are problems with it.

It's easy for a troll to find a new IP address. In many cases they wouldn't even have to do anything, as people's IP addresses change naturally over time (if <cg> blocked my IP address today I'd be back in about two days, from the same computer, without using a proxy). On the other hand, it's fairly common for unrelated people to share the same IP address, so posters other than the original problem user might be inconvenienced. (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.ph... shows the Wikipedia block log for IP address 82.148.97.69. For quite a while, Qatar's main Internet service provider, Qtel, assigned that one address to all or nearly all of its customers, and blocking that IP meant blocking most of an entire nation.)

Think about it this way: Daniel Freeman has invited a lot of people to a pub, a restaurant or his private party. The point for the assembly is to have fun (talk about chess). Of course, some people will start discussion which might develop to be quite loud and aggressive - but that is fine: you just ask them to cool down a little and at least keep their voices down.

But then there is this one totally drunk fellow, running from room to room, insisting on shouting his pet conspiracy theory to everyone. You have heard it once and shrugged it of as quite insane - but then he comes back, again and again and again. It doesn't help that you turn him away every time he approaches you, because in a second you will hear him shout his paranoia to the people next to you, for the n-th time.

Most people would understand that this is a deeply disturbed person, but since he is ruining the party for most of the people, you throw him out.

Very few would wish to forbid him to ever say such things - but not <here>.

<Abdel Irada> spelled out some common sense. Please don't interpret this measure as a way to complete automate the job of forum administration so we never have to intervene again. It's a tool designed to help our work, not eliminate our work.

<Appaz> Yes, I do understand the point that you are trying to make and I completely agree with it, but I am just not sure whether banning a particular user will work as they can conveniently create a new account and continue with their trash talk.

Here's my metaphor for the Kibitzing Brakes solution:

We make a decision that we don't throw the shapeshifter out the window, but instead we will shackle several bowling balls to each foot. As an happy consequence, due to another type of magic, everybody who attaches one bowling ball will be unable to hear a word that comes out of the shapeshifter's mouth.

The shapeshifter, realizing its plight, may slink out of the party and return in a new guise, but as soon as it reveals itself as a shapeshifter, it's shackle-time again.

Maybe the shapeshifter will grow weary of the sport and leave, or maybe not. Maybe the shapeshifter will come back and be courteous and productive, or maybe that's not possible with this individual.

The thing is, not every problem can be measured quantitatively in terms of number of ignores, amount of time on the site, etc.

There are trolls and there are trolls; there are ignores and there are ignores.

Some trolls are annoying. Others are sociopathic creeps who enjoy harassing other users.

Some ignores are applied because the ignoree was a pest by any definition; others, because he persisted in refuting the ignorer's bad logic.

These differences aren't reflected in the numbers. They can't be.

The *only* way you can really understand what's happening in your forums is to go there and watch for a while. Get to know the locals. See who says what to whom, in what context, and with how much relentless resolve to inflict damage.

After a little bit of this, you won't need to investigate complaints from square one, because you will already know what to expect. The real problem users will be known and under scrutiny because you've seen them in action and know why they're a problem and some other controversial users aren't.

(If you want a literary model, consider the _1,001 Nights_, where Harun al-Rashid and his wise counselor, Jafar, used to go out in Baghdad, dressed as commoners, and find out for themselves what life was like for the average citizen.

You needn't dress as a porter, and the madcap adventures the twain had are not essential. But getting to know your realm is indispensable.)

I have a different point of view. I very, very rarely use the ignore feature -- in the past, when I have, it has almost always been a response to a personal assault or a spamming of my forum, and even then I've tended to lift the sanction as soon as the danger passes. Which it normally does.

I like to be aware of what's going on, even in principle. Using ignore to cut myself off just goes against the grain. Also, I seem to have less propensity to take offense than some other people do -- I think <tolengoy> is absurd, pathetic, repetitive, predictable, etc -- but none of these things actually offends me. I can live with lunatics, if they keep a certain distance.

Or what who is saying to the whole world. Everyone can read it, and they do, until they "learn" to turn on the blind eye (ignore button) - how clever!

I envy you and your exciting life of non-stop action.> Well, thank you for your well-meant, non-sarcastic compliment!

<On that site trollers, or posters who don't abide to the posting rules, simply get banned by the moderators. Moderators are following discussions closely, and if they sense an obnoxious, insulting, very annoying or <<<off-topic seeking person>>>, he gets banned>

<So if I want to discuss battery-powered wrist watches I would get banned?> Absolutely not. Quartzes are discussed frequently, but admittedly, the visitors find mechanical watches more exiting. There are countless sites on the internet for people who love electronic devices - the site in question, however, isn't one of them.

It may not be the best solution according to some, but as you said:<something> had to be done about the one individual hurting the business.

When a person tries to make a point, no matter how disagreeable, the point is made, and if no one agrees, then fine.

You move on.

But constantly debasing someone's accomplishments on a daily basis when that person is not even around to defend himself ( not that Carlsen cares what a non entity says) is simply ridiculous.

And even worse: if you do not agree with the troll's opinion, he proceeds to insult you calling you feebleminded, etc.

He even went full throttle on <Abdel Irada> insulting his service record.

That was a disgraceful episode in itself.

The poster in question has never even paid a premium membership in this site, why should he get to satisfy his twisted urge to troll the pages into oblivion, while premium members have to stand by and see all reasonable discussion get derailed?

It wasn't right, and I for one, am glad some measures are being taken.