Jon: I refer you to the spurious "Folk Foundation wishes to sponser [sic] Mudcat" wherein I responded – mea culpa! – to the GUEST with the temporary moniker "No One Wins a Flame War" (which, come to think of it, could be abbreviated as "NOW a Flame War"), who I believe is also the first GUEST to respond to this thread (on 12-Feb-02 - 08:45 PM).
I made the same point to him/her there that kat made in this thread. His/her reply was, first, to misconstrue my message (I had said that the standing-on-the-sidelines-and-criticizing behavior was not helpful; {s}he claimed that I'd said I didn't find his/her suggestions themselves helpful), and then to ask me if I had some "positive suggestions to share that could help us get beyond the flame war era here at Mudcat" and that "[(s)he'd] be happy to hear them and discuss them with [me]." My suggestion was for people to comply with Max's request to stop the flaming behavior voluntarily before he implemented changes to the site to deal with flamers.
Of course, "N.O.W. a Flame War" did not return to "discuss" my suggestion. One GUEST did make a post that was deleted (a personal attack, presumably, though I was off the computer having a life and didn't read it), according to the Forum Search.
So, Jon, I have to conclude that even when these GUEST flamers and GUEST trollers claim to be interested in a rational discussion, they're not. It is as you said; they derive "some egocentric joy from destruction".
Max has already said in his recent letter to GUESTs that he's going to decide what he's going to do about this situation and he's going to announce his decision and there is going to be NO DEBATE about it. He says he's already heard all he's going to hear on the subject. The GUESTs can go around and around about what they'd like as much as they'd like, but the bottom line is that if GUESTs do not stop flaming and trolling Mudcat, Max WILL change the site to prevent them from doing so. Period. End of subject.