Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Punish Bad Users With Drupal Misery

Posted by samzenpus on from the what's-good-for-the-goose-is-good-for-the-griefer dept.

If you're sick of banning or deleting troublemakers on your Drupal website, you might want to check out Misery, the module designed to give trolls a taste of their own medicine. Creating a random length delay for a user, redirecting them to a random page, presenting them with a 404 error, and crashing their browser if they're using IE6 are just a few of the things you can make users endure with Misery. I'm still waiting patiently for a Punch In the Nose module, but this is a good start.

10 of 418 comments (clear)

  1. Alternatively by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If Misery isn't enough for you, you can try the module "Crime Against Humanity". It forces the trolls to admin a site that runs Drupal.

  2. Trolls by parlancex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I always thought the most effective way to combat trolls would be to silently flag their account, allowing them to post and continue viewing the forums as normal, but everything they do is completely invisible. The system could also generate fake replies to their replies and threads, also completely invisible.

    1. Re:Trolls by _0xd0ad · · Score: 5, Informative

      So that would be...

      If you want to give your trolls the silent treatment try the Cave module.

    2. Re:Trolls by FriendlyPrimate · · Score: 5, Funny

      Interesting. Why do you feel that the most effective way to combat trolls would be to silently flag their account, allowing them to post and continue viewing the forums as normal, but everything they do is completely invisible. The system could also generate fake replies to their replies and threads, also completely invisible?

    3. Re:Trolls by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting

      you might as well just put all the troll flagged accounts into the same bubble, so they could see each other's posts, but they would all be invisible to everyone else.

      That was seriously considered for an early MMORPG. Annoying players would be dumped into a dungeon level full of NPCs and other annoying players, where they could flame war and player kill as long as they wanted, without bothering anybody else. It wasn't done due to resource constraints, but it remains a good idea.

  3. Re:For the sake of satisfying my curiosity... by recoiledsnake · · Score: 5, Funny

    HTML code

    --
    This space for rent.
  4. Crashing IE6, eh? by lluBdeR · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is there a way I can enable this, like, sitewide by default, punished user or not?

  5. Re:their/they're by smelch · · Score: 5, Funny

    Really? Thank you so fucking much. Nobody knew that at all. It certainly couldn't have just been a slip, it had to come from ignorance. I'm so excited that I can come to this free internet to learn about grammar from such excellent minds as yours.

    --
    If I can just reach out with my words and touch a butthole, just one, it will all be worth it.
  6. Harming your users by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Harming your users doesn't seem to me a good idea at all. Adding more bad behavior to the Internet is unlikely to improve anyone's situation. And crashing their browsers? That crosses an ethical line, in my opinion. What's next, infecting them with malware out of spite?

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  7. Re:DailyKos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's perfectly valid to be in favor of free speech, but not want to hear everything everybody has to say. I think that piece of shit preacher from Florida is perfectly within his rights to do whatever he wants to a book he owns, but I won't watch him do it.

    If I called you an asshole, and you walked away, I could hardly claim you don't care about free speech since you're not listening to me any more. You've just decided you have better things to do with your time.

    You can claim that somebody is not interested in challenging his own ideas if he ignores everything to the contrary (think birthers); but that's a separate issue. Denying somebody the right to speak in your house is not a First Amendment issue or a free speech issue: he can still speak, but he's not guaranteed an audience.