I've written a Greasemonkey script which simply hides their input: on the comments threads. Beware, it'll also hide the comments of those who mention them in their comments too.

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/118170

If anyone needs any help with Greasemonkey, let me know.

Tested it today. Disabled it and looked at the BBC thread without reading... adulterated by timewasters.... then turned the NoTroll scripts back on.... ah.... lovely. Like it used to be.

Thanks, I tried it and it works - very useful. But it doesnt work on the discussion threads. Could it be adapted to work on other blogs?

I can make it work on Discussion threads too, just a matter of adding new selectors. As for other blogs, you'd need one per blog, and different selectors. It's not rocketscience javascript, the source is available on the site, so feel free to adapt it.

OK, it now works on Discussion threads and Unthreaded too. I believe you just re-install it, but Firefox is a bit temperamental and may force you to uninstall and reinstall, and a restart in between is advisable.

The danger, as I noted, is that if someone mentions one, their post is removed as well, so you would have missed Richard Betts famous post about the 2 degree catastrophe. But then anything important will be replied to by someone else, and you can always disable and re-enable the script temporarily.

The old version (troll-lite, if you like) is available on the original link under previous versions.

Is this wise?

First, what's the point of automated censorship? If you don't 'like' Zed's comments (or mine, or anyone else's), then skip them.

Second, as TBYJ himself points out, there is a significant danger of inadvertently missing important comments.

Third, do you really want an echo chamber? Imagine running your script at Curry's site, for example. Do you believe that removing one side of the debate would make comments there more informative, or less informative?

I'm genuinely interested.

Hi BBD, I didn't see your comment at first because you mentioned a troll name in there so your post got zapped. I have made a point of only including trolls in this - your name does not exist on the list, neither does Brownedoff etc, because although you don't agree with most people here, you debate, you cite, you accept when you've made a mistake or gone too far, you try to prove your points etc. The generally accepted rules of debate.

I will never add a genuine warmist, AGWer, consensualist or whatever to the list - it's not censorship by stance or opinion, simply by a measure of what they add to - and more importantly subtract from - the quality of the site for me. Purely subjective, which is why it's a client-side script, no need to impose it on anyone else, but it's there if you share my thinking on this.

By troll you know the two or three I mean - people who do not actively debate, just rehash the same old claptrap each time, eventually running from the debate when cornered. And those who chip in the odd stupid/racist/-ist single comments or are just plainly offensive. People who ruin the show, in other words.

Personally I can do without reading any more from them, because I've heard all they have to say on the matter, again and again and again. I don't need to see it any more. By trying to convert certain trolls to behave more deecntly, I've irritated the Bish several times, so for my own comfort and to avoid causing my own brand of white noise here, it's best *for me* if I just don't see certain trolls.

TheBigYin

Thanks for the response and kind words. I take your point - although your first sentence does bear out my caution # 2 ;-)