posted
LymeNet is inundated with false "Lyme patients" who are joining for the sole purpose of harassing us, disseminating dangerous misinformation, and (as with the recent case of Dr McSweegan) trying to trick us into believing Denialist lies and following what they want us to do.
I'd like to make a little suggestion about one thing that LymeNet (and any other open, moderated forum) could do to combat their activities.
When someone posts an assertion that we know is patently false, the moderators could insert a very visible "Health warning" next to the false statement, perhaps with a link to info clarifying the issue. The poster could then receive a warning, and if he persisted,receives an icon next to his name flagging up to everyone that he is considered a troll.
We could have a very short list of "false assertions", perhaps adopted from material on the website of ILADS, which LymeNet members vote into existence.
It should NOT be used to censor any legitimate debate (eg antibiotics vs herbs etc) but only things that we know are misinformation and dangerous if a new or uninformed patient were to read them.
If there is any dispute as to whether a statement should be on the "blacklist" or not, we could let Ilads doctors be the arbiters.
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Further to above, the reason I am not suggesting they should be expelled, is because their posts (and electronic info associated) may be valuable evidence for us to present in a public enquiry in the future, after we have traced those responsible.
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
randibear
Honored Contributor (10K+ posts)
Member # 11290
posted
Well I for one would not want to make the decision as to wbo is legit and who isn't....
-------------------- do not look back when the only course is forward Posts: 12262 | From texas | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
Pocono Lyme
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 5939
posted
The best thing IMO is to not reply to them.
If you do, they get what they want. In essence, they win and you lose --- much time and energy answering, time you could be helping yourself/others,...
Someone also brought up about catfish? I think that's what they're called. Many fall for them too.
-------------------- 2 Corinthians 12:9-11
9 But he said to me, �My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.� Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ�s power may rest on me. Posts: 1445 | From Poconos, PA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm sure it does. May be worse here due to the political climate surrounding Lyme.
I KNOW catfishing goes on everywhere. It's like a sick game.
-------------------- --Lymetutu-- Opinions, not medical advice! Posts: 96222 | From Texas | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
beaches
Frequent Contributor (1K+ posts)
Member # 38251
posted
Elena, your suggestion is excellent, but I think this would be way too time-consuming for the moderators here who work for free on behalf of the rest of us.
And I doubt that any of our LLMDS would be willing to be arbiters on this or any other forum.
I agree that we should let the trolls do their thing for awhile to see what ultimately comes out of a dialogue with them, which is usually nothing or less.
Posts: 1885 | From here | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged |
map1131
Frequent Contributor (5K+ posts)
Member # 2022
posted
I've noticed since the CDC big announcement that the guests on line is over 100 all the time now.
At first I was hopeful that it was people seeking help and I'm sure some of it is. But I also realize this site would be watched by the powers that be.
I bet they were really surprised how quickly we summed up their big CDC announcement propaganda. As a group we still have a brain and are becoming much too vocal and large.
Pam
-------------------- "Never, never, never, never, never give up" Winston Churchill Posts: 6478 | From Louisville, Ky | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I didn't express myself very well. I know the docs don't have time to come down to this forum. What I meant was, if opinion here was divided as to whether a statement should be labelled with a "Health warning" or not, we could use the articles and material written by ILADS doctors as our tie-breaker.
I do understand it's not easy for the moderators to spend extra time. I hope to collate some tips soon on how to spot a Denialist infiltrator.
Elena
quote:Originally posted by beaches: ... And I doubt that any of our LLMDS would be willing to be arbiters on this or any other forum.
...
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
"I've noticed since the CDC big announcement that the guests on line is over 100 all the time now."
I'm glad you mentioned that. I was wondering if it was my imagination, or are we being INUNDATED with Steerite spies and "Liars-for-hire"?
There are whole pr firms dedicated to doing nothing but this type of thing - they will furnish as many Liars as required - at a price , of course.
The hired disinformation mercenaries are not usually very effective in convincing anyone of anything as they soon reveal they don't know the first thing about Lyme.
More dangerous is people like "LHCTom" (Dr McSweegan) who pretended to be a patient for over a year, just so as to trick us into believing the CDC were right about Dr Sapi's culture test.
Beleieve it or not he is still posting under that name on LNE! But then, that whole forum was set up by him and his sad gang of criminals.
Elena
quote:Originally posted by map1131: I've noticed since the CDC big announcement that the guests on line is over 100 all the time now.
At first I was hopeful that it was people seeking help and I'm sure some of it is. But I also realize this site would be watched by the powers that be.
I bet they were really surprised how quickly we summed up their big CDC announcement propaganda. As a group we still have a brain and are becoming much too vocal and large.
Pam
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know our moderators are working hard to expose our enemies.
It can at times be difficult to tell who is a Denialist agent/spy and who is just badly informed.
I have recently been wondering whether a system of asking all members to validate their membership by paying a nominal fee by credit card would be an idea. This fee could be set as low as one penny, so as not to exclude anyone who is in hard financial straits, with the option for those who are better off to contribute more to help LymeNet set up the necessary software etc. .
Most of these spies and agents provocateur types would be very reluctant to register a credit card IMHO.
It would require some increase in LymeNet's security - you'd definitely need a secure link for the page where people entered their credit card details). When you accept a payment, the system would show you if the credit card details were fictitious.
I realise this is extra expense for LymeNet, but it might not be all that much (you might find your hosting company offers the SSL secure links for just a slight increase in the rate you are paying) and we could maybe fundraise to cover it.
It would also be necessary to hold the credit card details in a very secure manner naturally.
It might be worth it just to keep this as a reasonably safe space for people - LymeNet IMO is so important just as a space for suffering people to receive emotional support. It has undoubtedly prevented many suicides. It would be a shame to let these swine ruin that.
Some large social websites require credit card details before joining as a means of protecting their members, even though there is no charge.
One point - I know for a fact that Ed McSweegan and some of his henchmen try to organise dirty tricks where someone actually goes to see one of our good Ilads doctors under a false name, tells them a false story, and then tries to entrap them and use it to make false allegations to the Med Boards to bring them down.
Just worth bearing in mind...
We do seem to be inundated with strange commenters since the fraudulent CDC paper came out against Dr Sapi.
Elena
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
Keebler
Honored Contributor (25K+ posts)
Member # 12673
posted
- Rather than take time to engage in dubious posts, one can simply post a few important links so that if they are legit they will know where to find correct detail.
This would also help others who may see the thread but not understand some of the nuances of trolls. -
Posts: 48021 | From Tree House | Registered: Jul 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
The problem is, they are doing more than just posting dangerous misinformation (which would be bad enough).
Some of them are spending time trying to create a convincing fake persona as a patient, befriending real Lyme patients, trying to find out confidential information about our good doctors in order to frame them on trumped-up charges, and in general to do everything they can to harm the patients' movement.
McSweegan spent well over a year building up his "LHCTom/Tom Eames" persona and managed to deceive many real patients on many Lyme forums before he was eventually exposed here.
Elena
quote:Originally posted by Keebler: - Rather than take time to engage in dubious posts, one can simply post a few important links so that if they are legit they will know where to find correct detail.
This would also help others who may see the thread but not understand some of the nuances of trolls. -
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd like to share with all of you this incredible information which a friend recently called to my attention. The source is The Guardian, one of the leading dailies here in Britain:
"Robot Wars February 23, 2011 17
Online astroturfing is more advanced and more automated than we’d imagined.
By George Monbiot. Published in the Guardian 23rd February 2011
Every month more evidence piles up, suggesting that online comment threads and forums are being hijacked by people who aren’t what they seem to be.
The anonymity of the web gives companies and governments golden opportunities to run astroturf operations: fake grassroots campaigns, which create the impression that large numbers of people are demanding or opposing particular policies.
This deception is most likely to occur where the interests of companies or governments come into conflict with the interests of the public. For example, there’s a long history of tobacco companies creating astroturf groups to fight attempts to regulate them.
After I last wrote about online astroturfing, in December, I was contacted by a whistleblower. He was part of a commercial team employed to infest internet forums and comment threads on behalf of corporate clients, promoting their causes and arguing with anyone who opposed them.
Like the other members of the team, he posed as a disinterested member of the public. Or, to be more accurate, as a crowd of disinterested members of the public: he used 70 personas, both to avoid detection and to create the impression that there was widespread support for his pro-corporate arguments. I’ll reveal more about what he told me when I’ve finished the investigation I’m working on.
But it now seems that these operations are more widespread, more sophisticated and more automated than most of us had guessed. Emails obtained by political hackers from a US cyber-security firm called HB Gary Federal suggest that a remarkable technological armoury is being deployed to drown out the voices of real people.
As the Daily Kos has reported, the emails show that:
- companies now use “persona management software”, which multiplies the efforts of the astroturfers working for them, creating the impression that there’s major support for what a corporation or government is trying to do.
- this software creates all the online furniture a real person would possess: a name, email accounts, web pages and social media. In other words, it automatically generates what look like authentic profiles, making it hard to tell the difference between a virtual robot and a real commentator.
- fake accounts can be kept updated by automatically re-posting or linking to content generated elsewhere, reinforcing the impression that the account holders are real and active.
- human astroturfers can then be assigned these “pre-aged” accounts to create a back story, suggesting that they’ve been busy linking and re-tweeting for months. No one would suspect that they came onto the scene for the first time a moment ago, for the sole purpose of attacking an article on climate science or arguing against new controls on salt in junk food.
- with some clever use of social media, astroturfers can, in the security firm’s words, “make it appear as if a persona was actually at a conference and introduce himself/herself to key individuals as part of the exercise … There are a variety of social media tricks we can use to add a level of realness to all fictitious personas”
But perhaps the most disturbing revelation is this. The US Air Force has been tendering for companies to supply it with persona management software, which will perform the following tasks:
a. Create “10 personas per user, replete with background, history, supporting details, and cyber presences that are technically, culturally and geographically consistent. … Personas must be able to appear to originate in nearly any part of the world and can interact through conventional online services and social media platforms.”
b. Automatically provide its astroturfers with “randomly selected IP addresses through which they can access the internet.” [An IP address is the number which identifies someone's computer]. These are to be changed every day, “hiding the existence of the operation.” The software should also mix up the astroturfers’ web traffic with “traffic from multitudes of users from outside the organization. This traffic blending provides excellent cover and powerful deniability.”
c. Create “static IP addresses” for each persona, enabling different astroturfers “to look like the same person over time.” It should also allow “organizations that frequent same site/service often to easily switch IP addresses to look like ordinary users as opposed to one organization.”
Software like this has the potential to destroy the internet as a forum for constructive debate.
It makes a mockery of online democracy. Comment threads on issues with major commercial implications are already being wrecked by what look like armies of organised trolls – as you can often see on the Guardian’s sites.
The internet is a wonderful gift, but it’s also a bonanza for corporate lobbyists, viral marketers and government spin doctors, who can operate in cyberspace without regulation, accountability or fear of detection.
So let me repeat the question I’ve put in previous articles, and which has yet to be satisfactorily answered: what should we do to fight these tactics?
I am sure that these "Persona Management systems" are being deployed everywhere where the interests of the patients/public conflict with those of corrupt government agencies and/or corporations who stand to lose financially if certain facts become widely known.
You wrote:
"But I did notice the large amount of guests and I haven't logged in awhile. "
We are at a crucial juncture in Lyme history. The culture test developed by Dr Sapi et al is finding Lyme in chronically ill , antibiotic-treated patients.
Culture is always the GOLD STANDARD in microbiology - even admitted as definite proof of Lyme infection by CDC (of course they wrote that before they knew the new culture method would be invented.)
Further th e test is finding strains and species of Borrelia that are "not supposed to exist in the US" such as B. garinii.
The Denialists will pull out all the stops to try and sink this test, and for our part, we must do all we can to stop them.
Elena
quote:Originally posted by merrygirl: It has occurred in the PANDAS world as well. I am sure it happen everywhere. But lyme and PANDAS are "controversial" idk
But I did notice the large amount of guests and I haven't logged in awhile.
-------------------- Justice will be ours. Posts: 786 | From UK | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged |
The Lyme Disease Network is a non-profit organization funded by individual donations. If you would like to support the Network and the LymeNet system of Web services, please send your donations to:
The
Lyme Disease Network of New Jersey 907 Pebble Creek Court,
Pennington,
NJ08534USA http://www.lymenet.org/
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic