Doesn't it make no sense? Why do people say you need 20 points to enter chat to prevent trolls from jumping in? Basically, a troll could just simply ask questions here for infinity and even if you ban them, it takes no more than a few seconds to start again. The system is wired stupidly if you look at it like this.

We require points so members can become reputable in the community.

Trolls don't care about reputation as a "good" person in the community, and they can come by and disrupt what's available to them first then, be it spamming/attacking others in questions, or leading people on with semi-legit questions just to take people for a ride and waste everyone's time.

You need 20 points in chat to prevent trolls.

Why is there such an anti-troll establishment in chat but not in normal question asking? Why not require everyone gives photo ID and their physical address so you can go and kill them if you troll you? Simple.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

The needs of the many only outweigh the few because that's what people think is right. Whether it is is up for debate.

The rules are not set in stone. They are variables on the server that can be changed by hitting a few keys. It's not like it's hard. If I felt like hacking the community, I eventually could, but if fools will change it back, it's not worth it. So what do you gain by creating foolish rules to prevent trolls when by the very nature of this site breeds them because any outlet is good enough for a troll, even if just questioning?

In a simpler sense for some, if you can't completely stop trolls, why waste time setting up blocks in the road that makes it harder for them? You can't stop them in the first place. If you want no trolling, don't start a community; communities always have trolls. Trolls are not stopped by points. As stated before, a troll can earn the reputation and then proceed to disrupt and destroy as much as possible right after.

  • 7
    $\begingroup$ The easy answer is: Experience shows that this works. $\endgroup$ – Danu Jan 8 '15 at 13:46
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ Even if stopping trolls is impossible, that doesn't mean we shouldn't do something to deter them. And our policies make it slightly harder to troll, which deters some of them $\endgroup$ – Jim Jan 8 '15 at 15:13
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ "You can't stop them in the first place." Gentle readers, trolls are impotent - the only power they have is the power willingly given to them. $\endgroup$ – Alfred Centauri Jan 9 '15 at 1:10
  • 9
    $\begingroup$ I've still got a bridge for sale. Other landmarks are available depending on interest and funding. $\endgroup$ – tpg2114 Jan 10 '15 at 4:51
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Why do still we have hospitals, when we are all going to die and disappear? $\endgroup$ – jinawee Jan 11 '15 at 17:03
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ If you're so annoyed make your own website, a home server is not so expensive these days. And the anti-troll system is quite good, after all, the troll will waste much more time than the time lost by banning him. $\endgroup$ – jinawee Jan 12 '15 at 9:55

Why the minimum rep is fine enough to prevent trolling

This is effectively answered on the Mother Meta. The answers there are probably not sufficient for you, so I'm going to continue with a few extra points:

  • Chat is a place where people who spend their time answer questions here can hang out and respond to each other in real time (that's important). Allowing any "troll" in would probably ruin our fun there. I think that's a perfectly valid reason to have the 20-rep minimum.

  • A new user can certainly post questions, but until they hit 50 rep, they cannot comment on other threads so their trolling is contained to their own posts. If they are indeed trolling, they'll soon enough find their question closed.

  • Any user who writes multiple poorly-received (i.e., heavily downvoted) questions can get a temporary ban from asking questions.

  • Anyone who takes the time to earn 50 rep in order to troll has a lot of free time. They'll quickly find their posts getting downvoted, dropping their rep by 2 each vote. Once they get under 50, they'll no longer be able to comment and under 20, they cannot enter chat.

In a simpler sense for some, if you can't completely stop trolls, why waste time setting up blocks in the road that makes it harder for them? You can't stop them in the first place.

Trolls are people who just want to bother other people for no good reason. As long as people like this exist, we will set up whatever road blocks are necessary to keep them at bay, simply because they are annoying. If you want to put up with trolls, feel free to take it to a place where trolls are readily accepted (there are places like that on the internets); here, we prefer to prevent them as much as possible.

What happens if a troll does get the minimum rep & trolls chat

The Stack Exchange dev team have two ways of managing trolls:

  1. Users in chat can mute the abusing member. This allows users to not see the trolling posts in any chat room.
  2. Users in the chat can flag the post as inappropriate. With enough flags (or a present moderator), the user will get a ban from participating in chat.

So even if a troll does manage to get the required reputation, there are ways to block them from persisting in being a troll.


People here are afraid to make things work my way because my way is different.

Your way would require us to have little-to-no blockage against trolls by lowering/eliminating reputation limits. It is not out of fear that these limits are imposed, it is out of rationalized thinking and experimental evidence. We don't want to be annoyed or bothered by a subset of internet-capable people who want to be annoying and bothersome.

  • $\begingroup$ Can a user be temporarily banned from chat? $\endgroup$ – HDE 226868 Jan 8 '15 at 2:51
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes, you can be temporarily banned from chat. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Jan 8 '15 at 3:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @KyleKanos - How difficult is it to get 20 reputation? Trolls can gain 20 rep and still ruin your fun :P $\endgroup$ – User Anonymous Jan 8 '15 at 5:35
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @UserAnonymous: It takes 2 upvotes on answers or 4 upvotes on questions to get 20 rep. The real question is: is someone whose sole objective is to troll users in Chat going to spend the time figuring out a good answer just to troll? Experience says: No, they won't. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Jan 8 '15 at 13:29
  • $\begingroup$ Experience is subjective; everything is. When you look at two balls, you see the reflection of light and perceive two separate items. Are they two items, or are they millions of atoms bundled together, effectively making them billions of things? Is one dog just a dog? Inside its stomach lives tons of other organisms that break down and digest stuff within itself. Also, the dog's mind may work in bundles of semi-changeable state patterns. Would this mean that the dog is really just a single thing, or a series of things operating in unpredictable manners? Is the dog's wagging tail just muscle? $\endgroup$ – Margaret Rosa Jan 11 '15 at 7:10
  • $\begingroup$ I have personally experimented and have obtained enough points great enough to participate in chat and troll. The fact of the matter is, it can be done; it's not a question of "why bother". Someone will always bother, as far forward into the human-societal future as I can theorize and predict. The real problem is that this community is adjusted to repetition and stasis of its communal design. People here are afraid to make things work my way because my way is different. People don't like change ... ever. If everything could be unified, singular and perfect, everyone would love it. $\endgroup$ – Margaret Rosa Jan 11 '15 at 7:16
  • $\begingroup$ The point is, I am different than the massive majority of people. I have an eye that's keen to observation, and a mind that never fails to use pedantic reasoning to objectively philosophize and explain everything around me with what I am capable of understanding and making myself understand. If I was in power, things would be different. Think about if I was in power for a minute or so. What do you see? You see something different. $\endgroup$ – Margaret Rosa Jan 11 '15 at 7:17
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I have personally experimented and have obtained enough points great enough to participate in chat and troll. I declare shenanigans: you've never had more than 11 rep here. I'm currently updating my answer to include more relevant information to your comments. $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos Jan 11 '15 at 17:09
  • $\begingroup$ I have a massive assortment of accounts that I use to post all over this community with, from IPs across China, Ukraine, Mexico, and even Kenya. If you are referring to just this account, boy, are you wrong. I'm very versatile and have been around all StackExchange sites and I know the gist of it all. It shows your limited perception of my capabilities when you simply assume that I am bound by one account and IP address. Don't assume, my friend. I don't care what you have to say if it's about policy or whatnot, because I don't come here and post to abide by policy or rules. Take a bigger hint. $\endgroup$ – Margaret Rosa Jan 12 '15 at 6:35
  • $\begingroup$ Call shenanigans all you want, buddy. Block me again. Do you think I care? I've been through this for years and the fact that I'm still around here now proves that the system is not perfect, and will never be. You pretend like you may banish those "evildoers" who don't follow your hierarchy of dominance and power, but guess who's still talking to you right now. Looks like you'll have to remove comments from your site if you plan to "stop" those "evildoers". Also, you better require photo ID and social security numbers to post too, because I can easily switch proxies in a matter of seconds. $\endgroup$ – Margaret Rosa Jan 12 '15 at 6:39
  • $\begingroup$ My purpose is to prove that the system is flawed, and over the years I keep getting more and more proof to do so. Notice how nobody could deny that the hierarchy and "democracy" of this site is perfectly related to racial dominance hierarchies. I guess you can't play liberal now, can you? Not when your own system kicks down "the minority" whom it doesn't have the power of word from. We all know this site is used mostly by "white people", as simpletons would put it, of course (there's more to "race" than skin pigmentation, though, so that's why I stressed the word "simpleton"). $\endgroup$ – Margaret Rosa Jan 12 '15 at 6:40
  • $\begingroup$ The people in power won't admit that their system works like a racial dominance hierarchy. Guess why I'm right? Because I keep gradually proving that it does. I am just one person, but I have more right, logic, and fact on my side about the whole functioning of this site than everyone who "runs" it. If you are going to say, "Well, it applies everywhere!", don't bother saying anything then. Things only apply when people apply them. When the "whites" on this site determine the "right" way for it to work, don't be surprised when you get virtual rocks and protests thrown at you. You are safe. $\endgroup$ – Margaret Rosa Jan 12 '15 at 6:46
  • 21
    $\begingroup$ How to know someone is full of it: they call racism in a thread discussing automated IP blocks on a site where the race of members is largely unknown. $\endgroup$ – Shog9 Jan 12 '15 at 16:14

Physicists tend to be more impressed by experimental evidence than theoretical reasoning, and the experimental evidence is that we are keeping trolling under control. If this was being achieved at the cost of widespead repression I might be concerned, but my experience is that we're a pretty liberal bunch hereabouts. So I can't see any urgency to review the various restrictions we have placed on low rep users.

Actually I see the low incidence of trolling as evidence that the site is working well. Trolling is most effectively when issues are a matter of opinion, and physics is rarely a matter of opinion. Generally speaking a question about physics will have a correct answer, and our answerers do a good job of not just giving the correct answer but explaining why it's correct. In the face of such clear exposition trolls get reduced to posting obscenities, and since this achieves little more than the raising of eyebrows and rapid deletion I suspect it's unsatisfying for the trolls.


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .