In regard to trolls and disruption of otherwise useful dialogue, one very powerful tool…

think of the possibility that a good sort of international currency might EVOLVE before the time when an official establishment might occur. …my personal view is that a practical global money might most favorably evolve through the development first of a few regional currencies of truly good quality. And then the “integration” or “coordination” of those into a global currency would become just a technical problem. (Here I am thinking of a politically neutral form of a technological utility rather than of a money which might, for example, be used to exert pressures in a conflict situation comparable to “the cold war”.)~Ideal Money

In regard to trolls and disruption of otherwise useful dialogue, one very powerful tool we could have, if it were discussed with such a crowd, is to not let key words be hijacked.

Now if I say this on reddit I’ll get 100 objections, but in relation with you, I know I won’t…with this caveat/understanding…

No one owns words, but if we don’t peg down shared definitions then what use is language? This is what so many of these trolls, including Ver are doing. They are using words like central-planning, centralization, consensus, hard-forking etc. all with near backward meaning to how the scientific community and lead devs are using them.

This allows these big blockers to twist their definitions such that their arguments can remain circular but in disguise.

The proper counter to this is propriety. For many known and respected players to consistently and constantly stop the big blocker proponent to make them clarify if they are using the conventional definition or not.

Only a troll would respond that this unfair.

There is no legs for the big blocker argument once you make them admit and explain the definitions for the words they are using.

Often they use two definitions for the same word in the same sentence or paragraph.

This is how you make them go away, you highlight their ignorance and force them to an accepted standard, or show that they will not adhere to it purposefully.