INTERESTING! "COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control

[dutch508]

   AHHH!H!!!!!!H!H!H THWEY ARE UMOUNG US!!!!

BeHereNow  (1000+ posts)      Sun Feb-14-10 03:39 PM
Original message http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x281170
INTERESTING! "COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of a internet forum"
 Found this posted at another message board. Apparently we are not alone.
BHN

"There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a 'uncontrolled forum.'

Technique #1 - 'FORUM SLIDING'
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum - it can be quickly removed from public view by 'forum sliding.' In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to 'age.' Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a 'forum slide.' The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a 'forum slide' and 'flush' the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then 'replying' to prepositined postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting 'slides' down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.

Technique #2 - 'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at www.abovetopsecret.com ) is 'consensus cracking.' To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made - but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger 'evidence' or disinformation in your favour is slowly 'seeded in.' Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then 'abort' the consensus cracking by initiating a 'forum slide.'

Technique #3 - 'TOPIC DILUTION'
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a 'RESOURCE BURN.' By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a 'gossip mode.' In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to 'drive in the wedge.' By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.

Technique #4 - 'INFORMATION COLLECTION'
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a 'show you mine so me yours' posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your 'favourite weapon' and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite 'technique of operation.' From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.

Technique #5 - 'ANGER TROLLING'
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes - without the requirement to 'stage' a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to 'lead' the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you 'do not care what the authorities think!!' inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.

Technique #6 - 'GAINING FULL CONTROL'
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings - and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the 'ultimate victory' as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a 'honey pot' gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes."

Great forum for those who follow peak oil.
"Life After the Oil Crash" (LATOC)
http://www.doomers.us/forum2 /


BHN
 

you poor crazy fat bastards.

Chisox08  (928 posts)      Mon Feb-15-10 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
86. Is that you agent Mike or is it agent Smith?

slay  (1000+ posts)      Sun Feb-14-10 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. I have no doubt this type stuff goes on
 We are up against some evil, evil ****ers who will do ANYTHING to maintain power and control.

 

I seriously doubt that Bush will step down...

BeHereNow  (1000+ posts)      Sun Feb-14-10 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Yes, they do-
 I can remember some pretty strange cases on DU several years ago-
Can't think of the one person's user name, but they were giving Andy S. and me HELL.
Real FREAKS!
BHN

 

quiet.american  (1000+ posts)      Sun Feb-14-10 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Indeed. 
 Give the rules of DU, won't say more at this point, but every single technique in that post, ahem, seems to have been used here. And all the while, the irony is that while chaos reigned, the rules prevented anyone from actually calling it out.

 
suck it, bitches!

Snarkoleptic  (1000+ posts)        Sun Feb-14-10 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
31. Now that we're properly equipped, it's time to silence the RW nutjobs at-
 mortgagegrapevine.com

Other than username and e-mailed password, there's no security.
These republiclowns need to be smacked down for operateing in an echo-chamber of RW talking points.

If you've got 10-minutes a day to spare, you can do the world a great service by posting there.
Mahalo

!

funny- when they think others are doing it to them it sucks....but then they do it to others WIN!!!

undergroundpanther  (1000+ posts)        Sun Feb-14-10 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
67. Than this should be interesting..
 Edited on Mon Feb-15-10 12:05 AM by undergroundpanther
a kind of history of trolling..

Today the Internet is much more than esoteric discussion forums. It is a mass medium for defining who we are to ourselves and to others. Teenagers groom their MySpace profiles as intensely as their hair; escapists clock 50-hour weeks in virtual worlds, accumulating gold for their online avatars. Anyone seeking work or love can expect to be Googled. As our emotional investment in the Internet has grown, the stakes for trolling — for provoking strangers online — have risen. Trolling has evolved from ironic solo skit to vicious group hunt.

“Lulz” is how trolls keep score. A corruption of “LOL” or “laugh out loud,” “lulz” means the joy of disrupting another’s emotional equilibrium. “Lulz is watching someone lose their mind at their computer 2,000 miles away while you chat with friends and laugh,” said one ex-troll who, like many people I contacted, refused to disclose his legal identity.

Another troll explained the lulz as a quasi-thermodynamic exchange between the sensitive and the cruel: “You look for someone who is full of it, a real blowhard. Then you exploit their insecurities to get an insane amount of drama, laughs and lulz. Rules would be simple: 1. Do whatever it takes to get lulz. 2. Make sure the lulz is widely distributed. This will allow for more lulz to be made. 3. The game is never over until all the lulz have been had.
snip


Does free speech tend to move toward the truth or away from it? When does it evolve into a better collective understanding? When does it collapse into the Babel of trolling, the pointless and eristic game of talking the other guy into crying “uncle”? Is the effort to control what’s said always a form of censorship, or might certain rules be compatible with our notions of free speech?

One promising answer comes from the computer scientist Jon Postel, now known as “god of the Internet” for the influence he exercised over the emerging network. In 1981, he formulated what’s known as Postel’s Law: “Be conservative in what you do; be liberal in what you accept from others.” Originally intended to foster “interoperability,” the ability of multiple computer systems to understand one another, Postel’s Law is now recognized as having wider applications. To build a robust global network with no central authority, engineers were encouraged to write code that could “speak” as clearly as possible yet “listen” to the widest possible range of other speakers, including those who do not conform perfectly to the rules of the road. The human equivalent of this robustness is a combination of eloquence and tolerance — the spirit of good conversation. Trolls embody the opposite principle. They are liberal in what they do and conservative in what they construe as acceptable behavior from others. You, the troll says, are not worthy of my understanding; I, therefore, will do everything I can to confound you.

http://conuly.livejournal.com/1445545.html

more on trolls
http://www.everythinginmoderation.org/2003/10/an_oldsch...
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/net-abuse-faq/troll-faq /
http://4-ch.net/net/mobile.pl/1112960050
http://www.messybeast.com/dragonqueen/newsgroup-users.h...

anti troll
http://www.goarticles.com/cgi-bin/showa.cgi?C=2475043

 
UGP appears!

snot  (1000+ posts)      Tue Feb-16-10 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #89
106. VERIFICATION -- we all should do more.
 Snopes, good point. I don't mean to be snarky, but next time, why not just DO it?

I just checked. It's not on Snopes; so I sent it to them.

And first, how about just following links back to the the original source?

In fact, why not source the story before posting the O.P.?

I find the O.P. plausible, but it would be a lot better if it provided a link back to someone other than an anonymous poster who never identifies his/her own source.

The furthest I can trace this back is to post submitted by "docholladay" on 09/08/2008, on a Ron Paul site at http://www.dailypaul.com/node/60831 , which says it was originally "posted a few days ago by "jshowell"" -- however, searching the Ron Paul site using a variety of different terms, I've been unable to turn up any earlier posting of this info by jshowell or anyone else. Which doesn't mean it was never there. There IS a poster named jshowell with a lot of posts of such a nature that a post like this wouldn't seem surprising.

Next, try a general browser search on one or more key phrases. I found many hits showing that this info has been posted on many liberal or libertarian forums, but most give no source or trace back to the docholladay post, and none are from a date earlier than the docholladay post.

Hopefully, Snopes will come up with something. 'Til they or someone else does, the status of the story remains, for me, "interesting and as yet unverified."

dammed ronulans.

Lydia Leftcoast (1000+ posts)      Mon Feb-15-10 09:43 AM
Response to Original message
96. This gets moved to the 9/11 dungeon?
 Verrrrrrrrry interesting.

 

SDuderstadt  (1000+ posts)      Tue Feb-16-10 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #107
108. Are you implying the moderators for this forum are...
 not impartial?

you poor porr cazy fat bastards...

[bijou]

Wow, you've hit a rich vein of crazy there dutch. 

[AllosaursRus]

Black Helicopters, oh noes!!!!!!!!!1

Rove, you magnificent bastard!

[DumbAss Tanker]

The funniest part is that all those disruptor techniques are applied every day at DU by their own real, honest-to-God, bona fide moonbat members.

 

[delilahmused]

Sometimes moonbat is really hard to comprehend.

Cindie

[jukin]

You can't convince me that the entire population of the DUmp would not have been in the Hitler Youth.

[DumbAss Tanker]

You can't convince me that the entire population of the DUmp would not have been in the Hitler Youth.

Ideologically maybe, but I don't think they could have managed to be that organized...then there was a fitness thing involved too...and leaving the house...

[Karin]

Snarkoleptic  (1000+ posts)        Sun Feb-14-10 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
31. Now that we're properly equipped, it's time to silence the RW nutjobs at-
 mortgagegrapevine.com

These republiclowns need to be smacked down for operateing in an echo-chamber of RW talking points.

WHO needs WHAT?  Who are you to tell me what I need? Go to hell.   Mortgagegrapevine appears to be a real estate financial forum, where people can drop in a political comment.  Snarkoleptic went to visit:  

Political: Republiclown (SOP) hypocrisy...you probably shoudn't watch this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0KZstFtrnU

After which a youtube video of a certain carpet muncher
by Snarkoleptic February 10, 2010 12:36 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Douchebag alert.

Rachel Maddow?

Yuk.

by splugy February 10, 2010 7:02 AM


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Richie Maddow - think we were in cubs scouts together.

by MikeM-NJ February 10, 2010 7:48 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

man that dude is ugly.
by rspringer February 10, 2010 8:18 AM

Link if you want it, but it's just more trollling nonsense.  

[The Village Idiot]

lol.

Madcow is one ugly dude!

[AllosaursRus]

Ideologically maybe, but I don't think they could have managed to be that organized...then there was a fitness thing involved too...and leaving the house...

Ah, but once you enlist, they would MAKE SURE you were fit and indoctrinized! 'Probly kill most of 'em! Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!1