So rather than keep to a definition that is objectively enforceable and sensible  to ensure only information that is presented as true is true. You want a definition that means the mods would need complete knowledge of every members life to enforce that is therefore meaningless and valueless. Anything could be inflammatory if you have personal knowledge of a persons life that may not even seem inflammatory to other readers at all. Trolling  from a forums perspective is only objectively enforceable using the forums definition in the rules as they are now.

I mean it is clear that you are afraid of needing to demonstrate any of our central points have been debunked, aka you know you can not debunk them because they are observable instances and are true.

You can't debunk them ( because they are true) so you want  definition where they can be true and have value but be called trolling because it is inflammatory to call scammers and scammer supporters... filthy skanky scammers or disgusting shit stain ass kissing scammer supporters. haha

Clearly trying to weasel out of the requirement of demonstrating they can debunk or demonstrate our central points are incorrect.

Can't debunk an observable instance or demonstrate it is incorrect =  THEN IT IS NOT TROLLING - got it scammer supporter.

Claiming independently verifiable observable instances are TROLLING when you know you can not debunk them is TROLLING TROLLING and should be punished to prevent this method of hiding, obscuring, derailing and generally trying to cast doubt upon the truth that you know you can not debunk because it is TRUE.

Take these scammers supporters sigs away and watch them squeal like the weasels they are.

So here we have it, there is no credible and valid objection from them to being called scammers or scammer supporters, it seems like just don't like being called filthy dirty skanky scammers or degenerate asskissing servile scummy scam supporters.

Tough shit scum bags.