The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > How would you define 'Trolling?'

How would you define 'Trolling?'

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 12
  7. 13
  8. 14
  9. All
I've scrawled a few websites and they define
'trolling,' as:

1) "The act of purposefully antagonizing
other people on the internet..."

2) "The act of appearing on internet forums
with malicious intent..."

How can any of these things be proven?
Could it be that what we suspect as "trolling,"
is simply our own bias coming out against the
opinions of others that differ from our own?

Your thoughts on this topic please.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 24 April 2009 11:52:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
YES. I've always believed that we define a troll as one who differs from our opinion, AND persists in doing so.

What a damned nuisance they are!!.!!.......!

( Gotyer' you exclamation mark monitor you!!.............!!
Posted by Ginx, Saturday, 25 April 2009 3:26:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think number one fits the most common definition of trolling.

Posting with malicious intent is defensible in the name of free speech. However, malicious posters frequently refuse to justify their malice, and persist with arguments that are easily and routinely disproven.

You can only point out that 2+2 does not, in fact, equal 5 so many times before frustration turns to abuse, at which point the discussion begins to look like the product of a deliberate troll.
Posted by Sancho, Saturday, 25 April 2009 3:49:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Trolling is an intention or an exuce to block people's posts who does not like,for one milion reasons.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Saturday, 25 April 2009 4:11:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
Simple look under Billy Goat Gruff's Bridge :-) he he he he.

I view trolling as one line highly provocatively/negative/nasty response without any explanation or substance to permit a rebuttal i.e. "Only an idiot would believe this" or "more of Kevin/Malcolm's crap" etc.

Introducing topics that are stalking horses for topics that have been already been debated and or interrupting a topic to continue a debate on a separate/unrelated issue i.e. justifying a comment in a previous unrelated topic. or axe grinding.
Posted by examinator, Saturday, 25 April 2009 4:35:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
I thought that your No1 "The act of purposely antagonising others on the internet" Was called flaming.

I think a troll is someone who persistantly raises the same topic.

However I would like to see Graham's view on this term, after all he decides whats allowable and what is not.

What anoys me is that one cannot express a contrary view on subjects like illegal immigrants, multiculturalism, forced marriages, high immigration or allowed FGM, without being immediatly being labeled a racist, right wing,islamphobic or xenaphobic by CJM, Sancho or Ginx. These will not argue the issue but use personal attack to try and intimidate.
Posted by Banjo, Saturday, 25 April 2009 5:07:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks a lot for this thread, I'd heard the term but not understood what it was, other than unpopular, lol.
I tend to agree with Banjo, without specific names, but he has a very valid and timely point, IMO.
Posted by Maximillion, Saturday, 25 April 2009 5:15:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think that trolling and flaming are
inter-related. Trolling to me is -
purposely putting up a provocative topic for
discussion as "bait," hoping for a "bite,"
so to speak. The person has no interest in
actually knowing anything about the topic
they simply want to stir things up or "flame-bait."
Flaming is posting something that insulting, eg.
"you bloody idiot," et cetera.

What I have a problem with is - how can you tell
when a person is actually trolling - or when they
believe in what they're posting?

I'm coming to the conclusion that there are very
few genuine "trolls," as such on the internet.
Just people with various points of view. And
arguments that get emotional, heated, and at times
insulting, as a result of strong feelings.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 25 April 2009 5:35:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
examinator
The words provocatively/negative/nasty etc have so many different meanings between people from defferent backgrounds!
If we start to exclude, one after the other, if we exclude some because wrote "more of Kevin/Malcolm's crap" and the other because grabed an opportunity to promote his ideas in a very similar subject, if we PUT EVERYWHERE BORDERS AND LIMITS at the end we will CREATE A BIG CASE to stay in, as prisoners of our limits.
For me there is no troll, something different from my ideas, something different from me, but this is not negative, this is not a disadvandage, this is not a problem!
Let's leave all flowers to flourish!
Antonis Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Saturday, 25 April 2009 5:44:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy
They simply want to stir things up,
Are you afraid from this?
Are you worry from stir things up?
Is not it part from a debate? Is not it the best part of the debate?
I THINK THE STIR THINGS UP IS THE SEOUL OF A DEBATE!
Mediterraneans have different, hot mentality, do not exclude us because we are not like YOU!
Antonis Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Saturday, 25 April 2009 6:05:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ok i will try to define the undefinable

trolling is the excuse given..when others cant rebut your debate.. and yet want to reply something to have the last say..[or a forum manager needs to give a reason for censoring a former poster]the vague definitive acusation of some deemable impropriaty

or when someone dosnt want the specific response or comment made ,to become part of a narrow or selective subjective subjective topic[a specific directional change away from an intended point made by the either the respondant or origonal poster of topic

its a clatons response..[the response you get when the point made is unrebutable ,yet thus voiced to silence disent][seeking either to alianate or censure a repondant.

amoung other things trolling is generally either off topic or deemed off topic, made by one who's word/meaning/understanding is exposed as lacking in meaning or substantiatable fact..[vis ;blind bias that precludes specific limitations] [and/or so named by such a one who's word skill is limited, thus exposing an unwanted direction the poster or moderator cant handle

some voice complaint of trolling ,..seeking censure, others voice complaint of trolling because of fear or malicious intent, but i see it as a sign of insecurity..[when words fail to achieve what their ego concieved..[be it true or faulse]..such are my thoughts on the topic at this time

trolling is a way to try to step away from their [a] prior written definitve but weak point [without losing face].. an attemt to lure you back to or away from a definitive topical limitation
Posted by one under god, Saturday, 25 April 2009 6:08:30 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As I was labelled a troll by several unwise people when I came back to OLO I find the word laughable.

Many people use it to denounce someone who debates in a determined and forceful manner.

I guess that is why I was captain of the debating team..Maybe my style made me a troll in the defeated minds of my opponents...lol

Please don't think I won every debate...but I rattled plenty of cages...lol

I've noticed, but of course may be incorrect, the people who use such names either object to a person's argumentative style, aren't winning the debate OR just do it to try to undermine a person's status amongst other posters.

In that way I suspect the people who use the term troll against someone, are either being a troll themselves OR are unable to use debate to convince people of their points of view. Either way you have defeated them as soon as they resort to the word.

All name calling is rather silly (although I may have been guilty of it at times) but hey if you can dish it out, you should be able to take it.

I gave up arguing politics many months back because I got tired of the usual Labor/Liberal garbage.

I dislike and don't trust all politicians equally and generally speaking, it seems, I am proven right...lmao

I haven't found anyone here that I would lower my standards to call a troll. Misguided and wrong yes, a troll NO!

Only joking!
Posted by Opinionated2, Saturday, 25 April 2009 6:15:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Another explanation is that "trolls" deeply disagree with a common view that's put but can't adequately find a way to explain what it is they actually mean so as to give the debate fresh legs.

As they tend to continually use, past its use-by date, the last successful rebuttal technique that they either coined themselves or borrowed from elsewhere, they're given a label. Probably the correct criticism of such people is that their arguments are growing stale because they are not thinking for themselves or moving with the times.

And I think, Foxy, you're right when you say that people accuse others of being trolls because they want to gain exclusivity to the debate. That is, their own bias is being brought to bear, quite possibly in proportion to the bias on the other side.
Posted by RobP, Saturday, 25 April 2009 6:26:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks for the honourable mention, Banjo!

By the time I get round to calling anyone racist, a thread contains so many sneering accusations that multicultural zealots want to turn Australia into a Muslim theocracy, and the condemnation is limited to such a specific group, while ignoring so many others, that to ignore the volume of racism involved would be embarrassingly naive.

If posters wish to state that they hate brown people for being brown people, and will not tolerate their presence under any circumstance, I will defend that as free speech, and at least everyone knows where they stand. But to disguise that sentiment with facile, legalistic arguments is an insult to all of us, and the bigotry behind it must be stated before any factual debate can take place.

Besides, to my recollection I've only ever called one OLOer racist. That particular poster's comments on foreigners are so consistenly vituperative, judgemental and riddled with tacit arguments for white racial supremacy that it's impossible for anyone with a functioning moral compass to respond without acknowledging the glaring race hatred.

If bringing racism into the open generates anger, that doesn't have to mean it's trolling.
Posted by Sancho, Saturday, 25 April 2009 6:38:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
AS
Even in Greek there are manners and respect for others. Trolling is when a person simply makes insulting remarks with no intention to debate a point.
I think that a person can make a point without being deliberately rude. Nor does that person need to be insulting.
Remarks like "Rudds crap" is rude and doesn't allow a person to feel comfortable in disagreeeing with you. Besides it isn't fact it's simply rubbish,nonsense. You can say I disagree with rudd because..... this is acceptable.
Posted by examinator, Saturday, 25 April 2009 6:42:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How would you define 'Trolling' Foxy foxy foxy. I am so surprised at you, and i thought you were smart?

Its easy! First you attach the appropriate lure, then you drag it behind the boat and space it carefully at the required distance.

Ho! Silly me. I thought you talking about fishing, but as irony would have it, as it works in similar ways to provoke the fish to bite, trolling in human sense causes the same reaction to take place but its obviously not the appropriate form of action in such a high caliber site such as this one.

But sometimes its the best way to provoke an emotional response especially when persons just beat around the bush with empty words.

EVO
Posted by EVO2, Saturday, 25 April 2009 6:49:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Antonios said that "heated debates," should be
allowed - because to a Mediterranean the heat -
is the soul of a debate.

I've got some Russian (slavic) blood in me from
my Gran. so I can understand that.

However there is a line
between arguing about something passionately,
and being mean-spirited, insulting, and hurtful
to others, that I feel should not be crossed.
And when that line is crossed, I automatically
become suspicious - that the other person is
deliberately "trolling," to provoke a reaction
from me. And I've predictably bought into it
many times, only to find out that - the people
in question actually believed what they were
saying. And simply viewed anyone who argued with
them as "the enemy."

I've learned that infantile finger-pointing
doesn't achieve anything
constructive. I now try not to degenerate into mass
disrespect for the rights of others to hold opinions
different from my own. Although I still find myself
capable of reacting,
when the right buttons are pushed.

Of course I'm not advocating that we agree on everything,
that would make OLO boring. We can, and should
disagree vehemently - but appropriately. I personally
feel that disagreement must be respectful, or the
disrespect ends up poisoning us more than the either
side's position in the argument ever could.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 25 April 2009 7:00:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
examinator
If some one used to use the word "crap" he will use this word for you or for me or anyone else.
Do you mean we will block him of cause this word?
I thought we encourage people to express their self, to express their thoughts, their ideas and the best way to encourage them
is to show an understanding, to accept the way they use to express their ideas.
At the end I am afraid we will block the others for their ideas using as excuse the "trol".
WE ARE CREATING A MONSTER TO BLOCK THE IDEAS WE DO NOT LIKE!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Saturday, 25 April 2009 7:04:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My favourite definition of "trolling,"
that I found on the web is:

"Being a prick on the internet because you can..."
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 25 April 2009 7:13:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am disinclined to give any credibility to the comments of those who will take a new poster to task over her grammar when it is patently obvious that her mother tongue was not English (now confirmed-thanks Rouge!).

Glass houses....Bongo?

Notwithstanding that, there have been some excellent definitions of trolling here. As defined; a clear modus operandii.

And as I think you are saying Foxy,-how the title 'troll' is used to disparage those who don't agree.
Posted by Ginx, Saturday, 25 April 2009 7:16:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well I,ll just say, hook line and sinker. I think penis or appendage would of been more sorted but contradictions are being handed out without the advantages of emotional control, which we all fall pray to at times.
But if you take all the villains out of the equation, you have a dead site on your hands as foxy explains quite well.

I think some of you people need to lighten up a little and just think with wit instead of raw profanity like big-hole, No punt intended.lol

EVO
Posted by EVO2, Saturday, 25 April 2009 8:33:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think that Foxy's first definition covers it quite well, although EVO2's usage applies too. Frequently we see here some pseudonymously posted inflammatory diatribe, after which the peron who posted it disappears until their next troll post.

Clearly the intention is to "troll" for "bites".

It's interesting that Banjo complains about being "labeled a racist, right wing,islamphobic or xenaphobic", when s/he habitually labels others as "Lebs", "illegals" etc.

I wouldn't call Banjo a troll, but s/he seems to me to be very receptive to "troll" posts at OLO.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Saturday, 25 April 2009 9:04:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I guess my interpretation of trolling fits pretty much into all of the definitions people have come up with. I privately regard it as an occupation whereby people deliberately incite others in order to try to reassure themselves of their own rightness. So I tend to consider trolls as people who are insecure almost to the point of the pathological.

But perhaps the reason there is confusion about the term is actually more to do with the way people define the terms "discussion" or "debate"?

In most definitions of the word, a discussion is described as being an extended form of group communication which includes the words 'deliberation' and 'consideration'.

However, some people seem to regard the word merely as signifying an opportunity for propounding thier own views. The willingness to either deliberate on or to consider an opposing pov is subsumed under a need for reassurance that they understand the world/an issue. Thier need to be right thefore is as necessary as the so-called "troll's", which is why they often are accused of trolling?

The meaning of the word 'debate' as being to fight or argue is now considered obsolete, and has been overtaken by the meaning of discussin (i.e. deliberating, considering) opposing points. Some people sincerely do not realise this.

Such people also seem genuinely not to understand that discussion of an opposing point can be objective. They regard all debate as personal and thus feel justified in excercising their "freedom of speech" to respond with personal comment. So they also are frequently regarded as trolls.

And then again, there are those rare few who are simply maladjusted and find satisfaction in stirring up trouble, causing dissention and intimidation. They were usually reared by wolves and live under bridges.
Posted by Romany, Saturday, 25 April 2009 11:07:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Troll is a catch-all word used to attempt to shut someone up or censor them
when the accuser doesn't like or doesn't agree with what they're saying.
The accusation of trolling is a form of obloquy designed to
make the recipient back off for fear of social opprobrium.
It's the internet equivalent of calling someone a
racist/sexist/homophobe/Islamophobe/xenophobe/etc.
It's generally used by those who can't substantiate their own viewpoint
in the face of an opposing viewpoint so they attempt to shut it down.
Posted by KMB, Sunday, 26 April 2009 12:06:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
i feel i need to agree with kmb, its just a catch all[missused by nearly anyone who uses it]to best decribe a legitimate troll i guess a demo is in order

this topic is re trolling in reality it is going off topic[see topics is how you control ideas]i have had many topic refused,because im trolling to debate the topic,but the moderator might not want that topic debated so no'new'topic is formed

so here the[this]troll begins[one topic refused was how come green turtles[a sea creature] lays its eggs ON LAND[when evolution will clearly say we evolved on to the land..[see the troll?]clearly the absurdity of a sea creature NEEDING land based breeding is an athima to those who love the delusion of evolution[need to love the delusion[thus regard mere attempt to make mention of it a troll

i should give other egsamples of topics i tried toi post but that may have been seen as trolling..[but then would have a real basis for this post to be rejected for off topic trolling[and for trying to repost the 8 topics rejected],a lose loose situation[but how else to raise the topic[i only want to raise the issue[but moderator dont want the topic..[so what else but to troll?

so there you have an egsample of a troll[i would try to post the rejected posts as a topic..[but know it would be refused[what i wanted was a catch all where all the unmentionable off topic trolls could be named[especially where they are refused their own heading[topic]

anyhow should any one respond to my off topic troll[you would get told dont feed the troll[by responding to the subject trolled for in the hope of discussing it]

ok so there you have a live egsample of a troll[a picture is woprth a thousand words[and my 350 must be gone by now]..many things are wrongly called trolls..[flaming is flaming[bad language is bad language[know the real troll can be simply a frustration others are trying to keep silent]

in a just world EVERY OFF TOPIC/TROLL would become a new topic

damm error mess-age
Posted by one under god, Sunday, 26 April 2009 6:36:48 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Wikipedia, which has vast experience in dealing with trolls, says, “The idea of defining trolling is in many ways comical at best.” http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/What_is_a_troll%3F#Definition_of_trolling

Trolls display great contempt for the others in the discussion: “You, the troll says, are not worthy of my understanding; I, therefore, will do everything I can to confound you.” http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/magazine/03trolls-t.html (page 5 of 7)

“An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" is a person who
posts outrageous message to bait people to answer.
Trolls delight in sowing discord on the forums. A troll
is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone
who is purposely provoking and pulling people into
flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end
with name calling and a flame war.

A classic troll tries to make us believe that he is a
skeptic. He is divisive and argumentative with
need-to-be-right attitude, "searching for the truth",
flaming discussion, and sometimes insulting people
or provoking people to insult him. A troll is usually
an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents
and in turning it against them.

While he tries to present himself as a skeptic looking
for truth ... his messages usually sound as if it is the
responsibility of other forum members to provide
evidence that what forum is all about is legitimate.

He (and in at least 90% of cases it is he) tries to start
arguments and upset people.”

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1032102

I would add that in my experience, trolls attempt to cast themselves as victims, so that they can then claim that they are being bullied. The strategy (if you can call it that) seems to be to discredit those holding opposing views by getting them to attack. Nevertheless, “Why are you trying to censor my legitimate question?” sounds a bit hollow coming from someone who has just deliberately enraged thousands of people.

Also, trolls are invariably anonymous. It’s not something you would be proud to do under your own name.

Finally, the Wikipedia’s first piece of advice on dealing with trolls is informative: “When you try to decide if someone is a troll, strive to assume they are not."
Posted by woulfe, Sunday, 26 April 2009 9:12:57 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I must admit I thought a troll was a contributor who followed someone around on the forum a bit like stalking. Just goes to show we learn something new everyday.

At the end of the day, we all choose how we behave. We can choose to be civil or rude and we can choose to respond or ignore. The choice is always ours so I tend not to worry about it too much - life is too short.
Posted by pelican, Sunday, 26 April 2009 11:33:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear woulfe,

One of the best summaries I've read on "trolling,"
and "trolls."

Thanks.
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 26 April 2009 11:37:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
From some of the definitions of trolling so far it might be deduced that some would like to limit this forum to “debate” concerning only that which we can all agree on.
It sounds like the modern day education system is bearing its fruits:
“Marks will be deducted if the assignment is not inclusive or does not celebrate diversity”
(I have seen similar criteria on university(!) assessment feedback forms and marking guides).

Woulfe,
You say about trolls/trolling:
“inspires flaming rhetoric”
“pull(s) people into flaming discussion(s)”
which
“usually end(s) with name calling”
“discredit those holding opposing views by getting them to attack”
“deliberately enrage thousands of people”
”provoke people to insult him”
The one thing that these descriptions all seem to have in common is that they deny the agency of the respondent.
….‘He made me hit him’
I personally don’t feel enraged, upset, insulted or compelled to insult or name call or attack when I read a post I don’t agree with or even when posters insult or name call me, although I will sometimes point it out.
In this milieu, threads headed “Couples are only couples if they can marry” and “We should welcome Islamic diversity” are OK whereas “Children are best served by a mother and father” and “Islam appears to be disproportionately linked to global violence” will likely be condemned as trolling because they “insult, enrage or inspire to flaming rhetoric” those who disagree.
It is not surprising then that the majority of trolling accusations are directed against conservative viewpoints.
I welcome corrections to this general observation.

As for:
“He (and in at least 90% of cases it is he) tries to start
arguments and upset people”
It would certainly be interesting to see how these figures were arrived at given the relative anonymity of the internet.
Sounds like a bit of sexist stereotyping to me.
However I welcome the statistics which would back up the point.

As for:
“A troll is usually
an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents
and in turning it against them.”
Isn’t that simply an essential debating skill?
Posted by KMB, Sunday, 26 April 2009 12:43:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
oh dear a troll trolling on a troll topic...any how kmb quote<<threads headed“Couples are only couples if they can marry”and“We should welcome Islamic diversity”are OK..

..whereas“Children are best served by a mother and father”and“Islam appears to be disproportionately linked to global violence”will likely be condemned as trolling because they“insult,enrage or inspire to flaming rhetoric”those who disagree.>>you will note you have two digs at you fav topic, but your next comment is just too funny[lol]

<<It is not surprising then that the majority of trolling accusations are directed against conservative viewpoints.>>i could respond to the troll,..but think everyone sees the joke, but in not alone in thinking somehow con-serv-ative, could rightly more be descriptive conscriptive rather more than nomaly descriptive... but that would be responding to the troll;;lol

<<I welcome corrections to this general observation.>> and i would gladly reply your troll, but cant feed the troll..lol, you wouldnt read the rebutal anyhow, just getting off on the reading and response your troll ,and how it facilitated to substansiate your next response

nice try...lol
Posted by one under god, Sunday, 26 April 2009 1:18:51 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Let’s examine the derivation of the word Foxy;

The word – (Name) Troll is described in the Oxford dictionary as an Ugly cave dwelling being described as ether a giant or a dwarf.
The way some process logic in this place , then that is quite an apt description- or at worst- ends description.
That definition fits like a tailored glove to some here.
Ha, or Fishing – Search for something- Then it leads to internet intent and provocation etc.
The First description is best and adequate to work off ;
Posted by All-, Sunday, 26 April 2009 1:49:40 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In fishing: to troll is to cast out a line or two to see what will bite.

In mythology: a troll is an ugly creature that sits waiting to engage passers-by in pointless disputes with the aim of getting their goat.

On the internet: well, it's both.
Posted by The Snout, Sunday, 26 April 2009 2:57:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy

I have arrived at this thread too late to add anything that hasn't already been presented as a definition.

I would like to second Foxy's vote that Woulfe's post presents the clearest image of a troll and troll behaviour.

Also, Foxy, you are brave to start a topic like this, and we know that you are not 'trolling', because you respond to the posts made here.

Oh, just thought of a facetious definition:

A troll is anyone who calls you names and/or labels.
A debater is anyone who may or may not agree with you but doesn't call you names or labels.
Posted by Fractelle, Sunday, 26 April 2009 3:26:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well as a keen fisherman, I recon the first definition best describes trolling for me. The art of trolling a lure in order to catch a fish.

I also agree that there are some nasty cases out there on olo. Some people just can't help themseves when it comes to, unprevoked, personal insults.

We also have some real cases of 'tall poppys'. If working hard for 20 years, while all the same time taking high financial risks is wrong, then hang me.

I prefer to be inspired by success rather than opting to 'shoot someone down for it'..
Posted by rehctub, Sunday, 26 April 2009 6:11:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think we took a wrong way ..
The Limits on the limits and the rules on the rules will push the members far from the forum.
Already many members, good writers disappeared and I am afraid more members will leave the group.
Posted by ASymeonakis, Sunday, 26 April 2009 6:15:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Romany,
You wrote an excelent text about the troll BUT you forgot to write anything about the troll as AN EXCUSE to block new ideas, to block ethnic, religious or other minority's ideas, as an excuse to block any one we disagree.
Hunan Rights do not depend on majorities and apply to each individual person.
After the troll, the creation of a moster against the free speak WHAT IS THE NEXT?
Let's finish what we started!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Sunday, 26 April 2009 7:04:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Fractelle,

Thanks for your kind comments and input.

Dear Antonios,

No one is suggesting censorship of this Forum.
It already comes with rules that must be
adhered to or the Forum Administrator will
take action.

I've just come across an interesting website
that may be of interest to you and other posters:

http://kayaker.nl/troll.html

"Trolls on Usenet and other Forums."

Definition of a troll:

"Trolls are people (or posts) that make use of a
discussion forum the same way public bathroom walls
are used by some for graffiti.

These posts are sometimes malicious and inflammatory,
racist, sexist, insulting - anything that can
disrupt a discussion thread..."

It seem that according to this site - the best thing
to do is not be baited into responding. Because that's
exactly what the "troll," wants. And the more you
respond the more aggresive their response to you is
going to become - until the discussion is completely
destroyed and dragged down into a slanging match - so
the given advice seems to be - ignore
the troll and carry on a decent discussion with other
posters - simply ignore the troll and continue the
discussion among yourselves.

Now why didn't we all think of that? Or as CJ would say,
"Don't feed the troll!"

Now, I finally get it!
Sorry Folks, I'm a bit naive at times. Or as another poster
put it, I've got, "pixy stardust in my eyes," (Loved that!),
which perhaps isn't as bad as all that.

I'd rather be naive, than a "troll!."
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 26 April 2009 7:05:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Its interesting how many hypocrites are really on this site. I just have scanned some of the post histories of some of you, and it seems the ugly troll syndrome is quite contagious and i refer you all to the thread THE BIG BANG, and it appears trolls have been here long before I arrived and Bugsy was the first one I encountered.
Oliver made a totally logical response and was attacked with no provocation and seems to have always been here at OLO.

"SO DONT GIVE ME ITS JUST TURN UP CRAP. i HAVE BEEN HERE SINCE 2007 AND TROLLS WERE WELL ASTABLISHED" long before most new people.
( another example of trolling above)

I wonder where they learnt this from?

Maybe the long term members might just want to have a good look at themselves before i yell hypocrite again.

Metaphorically speaking of course.

EVO
Posted by EVO2, Sunday, 26 April 2009 7:20:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
EVO2 sweetie, keep yer' loin cloth on!
Posted by Ginx, Sunday, 26 April 2009 7:24:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Antonios: - (I hope its o.k. to use your first name?),

Thank you for your comment. You are one of the many posters on OLO whom I admire very much but please forgive me: I cannot quite understand your meaning in this instance? As I explained on another thread, I am wading through a period of total exhaustion lately which, no doubt, not only makes me difficult to understand, but also limits my own understanding.

Everyone:- one of the points I tried to make earlier was that perhaps sometimes what is seen as trolling is more a difference in understanding of what constitutes a debate or a discussion.

This was illustrated a couple of posts later when one poster, in response to one of the definitions given of trolling (“A troll is usually an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents and in turning it against them.”) replied with: "Isn’t that simply an essential debating skill?"
Posted by Romany, Sunday, 26 April 2009 10:49:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ginxy! "Keep your loin cloth on". lol I only take it off went have to walk across water. But I do understand where foxy and the balanced minds of Romany and others are coming from, but if people want to point their self-righteous fingers at any-one, I suggest they hunt for the first troll.

EVO
Posted by EVO2, Monday, 27 April 2009 1:28:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In a democracy, rich and poor, educated or not, men or women, wolves or goats all are equal, all should have a say, should have a voice.
I understand that we do like some posts. Houuuu! most times I do not like my posts!
OK! THERE TROLLS WHO LIVE UNTER THE BFIDGES, may be I am one of them!
What to do with them? Do not you see that we lost an important part from the right side? Do not you see that our forum became poorer withough them?
Our goal should be how to extend, improve our base, to icrease the number of members and their partisepation, not to scare them with trolls and extra trolls.
For me the best troll hunder on the earth was POL POT he did not left any troll under the bridge!
Let's open our hearts to accept more people from different backgrounds and different attitudes, let's learn to forgive them.
WE ARE NOT WITCH HUNDERS
We should block the gates which could used to block new or different ideas.

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Monday, 27 April 2009 9:33:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ASymeonakis,
Unfortunately, progressives are censorious by nature so your plea for tolerance of diverse opinions will go unheeded.
Posted by KMB, Monday, 27 April 2009 10:35:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More sitting around in a circle deciding just what actually defines those bad kids, those... other.

As far as I can see on OLO a troll is someone who doesn't agree with the established user base.
Get into the clique and you can sit around like this and determine who the troublesome users are,
what makes them so troublesome and how they should be excluded.

Here's an example of established user behaviour that would be considered trolling if it were done by anyone else....

Making the statement 'Do you believe these men? They don't judge women by appearance first? Ever?'

Having it pointed out to you by 6 male posters that they DO in fact check women out.

Ignoring this and continually going on about how these male posters are being 'dishonest' and 'telling huge porkies'.

Starting a new thread about how you found this amazing that 'a number of male posters denied assessing women in a sexual way'
, and that ', if I make the above claims I am subjected to attack, innuendo and outright insult. For stating the truth no less.'

Having it pointed out again with 6 quotes that prove you are mistaken, and that you have called people liars for no reason.

Ignoring the post, but going back to the origninal thread to end it off with 'Graham's claim that men don't judge women by appearance first. '

i.e. Misrepresent a bunch of posters,
ignore any clarification,
call them all liars, but then yell,
'I'm such a victim for telling the truth!'

I think really we should be making topics not about trolling,
but on playing the victim all the time
and passive aggressive behaviour.

Antonios,

'The Limits on the limits and the rules on the rules will push the members far from the forum.'

Exactly.
OLO seems to me like a bowling club wanting
new members and trying to survive,
while snearing at every potential new member who walks in the door,
and calling for an ever stricter dress code while ignoring
that those inside the club don't adhere to it.
Posted by Houellebecq, Monday, 27 April 2009 10:51:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Houellebecq,

Well, I'm glad you got that off your chest.

The purpose of this thread was not to finger-point
Dear Heart, but to discuss the topic.

If you want to discuss "victims," and such, you're
welcome to start your own thread.

Anyway, as another poster pointed out - we sometimes
forget that this Forum is supposed to be about
social and political debate - its not about slagging
matches (which is what "trolling," stoops down to).

We don't have to necessarily share or even accept
another's beliefs, practices and habits, we simply
have to make a positive and cordial effort to
understand them. It's called "toleration."
And take part in discussions by presenting counter-
arguments, facts, et cetera, not personal attacks,
labelling, or insults.

I don't think that's being unreasonable - or part of
a "club," or some (perish the thought), "conspiracy."

Anyway, as I've said to you in a previous post -
You're most welcome to join in. Not just snipe from
the sidelines.

Cheers.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 April 2009 12:05:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Houellebecq:"passive aggressive behaviour"

Spot on. It's a very female thing. The only males welcome are lapdogs.
Posted by Antiseptic, Monday, 27 April 2009 12:06:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
KMB
I am a progressive too! If it helps I am an airetic progressive!
Houellebecq
My friend you know better than me, why I am against the censors, opened or covered censors.
In really I want the creation of an association from forum members to protect their rights, to protect them from any kind of descrimination.
For me there is not left or right democracy, the democracy apply to all people, to all individuals and it is totaly independant from people's ideas, status, etc.
I do not feel very proud to speak how or why to limit member's rights when their rights had to be fully protected and out from any kind of discusions.
We are going to convert the forum to an old days classroom where the teachers speak and pupil only listen. The forum, is not a classroom and we are not pupil who have to agree with other members from the forum.
Every member from the forum CAN DECIDE ALONE WHAT IS GOOD OR WHAT IS BAD, every member from the forum will choose alone the way he/she think is the best way to promote his/her ideas. It is our weakness if we do not convince a member that an other behave could be more usefull for every one.
The creation of trolls, of monsters to censor the forum, or the threat to censor the forum in the name of the trolls is a sign of weakness, a sign that soon o later we will have huge problems.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Monday, 27 April 2009 12:13:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Antiseptic,

Now you're "baiting," aren't you?

Folks, this is a perfect example -of
when not to respond.

Otherwise it could drag this thread down
to another level.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 April 2009 12:21:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy:"Now you're "baiting," aren't you?"

I prefer to call it "trolling"...
Posted by Antiseptic, Monday, 27 April 2009 12:51:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Antonios,

I repeat - no one is talking about censoring a
persons views or opinions. On the conrary.

What is being asked is simply not to stoop down to
personal attacks or insults.

I don't think that's an unreasonable request.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 April 2009 1:57:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'What is being asked is simply not to stoop down to
personal attacks or insults.'

Unless they're Foxy, CJ, Fractelle, examinator etc, who are the good boys and girls who start lots of threads about how to improve 'behaviour' on OLO, and highlight Antiseptic's and Col's insults and personal attacks, while ignoring and cheering on each other's personal attacks of other posters.

So you can safely say, very selectively requested, and usually made a fuss of for purposes of patronising and labelling what are seen as the 'other', or for purposes of playing the victim.
ie. People who disagree with me are bullying me, I'm a helpless polite little victim, except when I call people liars or assholes or insult people myself, but I do it in a 'nice' way, as I'm one of the good posters. I'm just a victim y'know.
Posted by Houellebecq, Monday, 27 April 2009 2:20:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Houellebecq,
Rules are rules.
Only Foxy can call people "assholes".
Posted by KMB, Monday, 27 April 2009 2:23:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gentlemen, gentlemen!..pulleasse..

Hasn't the following even crossed your collective radar:

Houll's;-all YOU have proved is that a 'troll' is someone who has got under your skin.

Anti;-all YOU have proved is that men can even acknowledge the perception of being 'lapdogs'. You said it.

KMB;-all YOU have proved is that Anti's perception is correct. You three have turned into a yapping little chorus who simply back each other up.

Take a worming tablet.

(My turn now eh? OK. I'm waiting).
Posted by Ginx, Monday, 27 April 2009 3:09:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ginx,
Brilliantly said!
Posted by Psychophant, Monday, 27 April 2009 3:12:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Waiting for what Ginx? You sound like you have your head screwed on. All I'm saying is when someone constantly makes topics about enforcing the 'rules', or 'politeness' or net etiquette, they'd wanna make sure their house is in order, and that they apply their 'rules' objectively.

Otherwise all THEY have proved is that they are a hypocrite, or are just using a spurious argument to
marginalise people with whom they have differing opinions.

Opinionated2 had the best post here. People who complain about trolls...

' aren't winning the debate OR just do it to try to undermine a person's status amongst other posters.

In that way I suspect the people who use the term troll against someone, are either being a troll themselves OR are unable to use debate to convince people of their points of view. Either way you have defeated them as soon as they resort to the word.

All name calling is rather silly (although I may have been guilty of it at times) but hey if you can dish it out, you should be able to take it.'

It's not the name calling I object to, it's the hypocracy. Col, Antiseptic, or yourself can call me anything under the sun and I wont care. It's the snivelling 'I'm one of the 'nice' posters type who start these type of topics, or those who dish it out and then cry bully once their argument is unravelling that I object to.
Posted by Houellebecq, Monday, 27 April 2009 3:40:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ginx:"I know you are, but what am I?"

Oh yes, Ginx, truly scintillating...
Posted by Antiseptic, Monday, 27 April 2009 3:44:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Oh yes, Ginx, truly scintillating...

Posted by Antiseptic, Monday, 27 April 2009 3:44:59 PM"

By comparison you mean? Then I agree. It's not difficult.

____________________

Houell's mate,-I DO understand what you're saying, but this is a forum! It's frustrating at times, and when I'm not agreed with, I find it unfair and unjust! BUT; if defence of your opinion is structured in attacking the OP's motivation's/agenda....................................sheesh! it makes me uncomfortable to give people lessons on netiquette.

It isn't the best thing surely to defi...hits! I'm finding this hard.

Look: I refute the title feminist, because it's too structured for me, and because the burdens and fears that blokes have to cope with, sometimes go ignored,-or are considered 'wussy'. Believe me: I hate that!

Why does everything have to be a bleedin' war? All things being equal, men and women need each other. I wish to all hell that we could find the balance, because to attack a female (vicversy?) if she puts up something as having an ulterior motive is annoying. It is.

We will all defend our standpoint. I should know! And women DID-DID!!, come from a kitchen sink scenario to win their equality. It has been a hard road. WHY in defending themselves must they always considered to be diminishing men to jellies?-they are NOT.
Posted by Ginx, Monday, 27 April 2009 4:12:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I can only surmise that examinator's post of Saturday, 25 April 2009 at 4:35:49 PM was making an oblique reference to a certain Scandinavian aerial safari involving an overflight of the Norwegian village made famous in Edvard Grieg's composition of the piece in the 'Peer Gynt' suite, 'Wedding Day in Trolldhaugen'. (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2654#59738 )

I apologise for coming so late to the thread. At the time of examinator's posting I was engaged in a lot of upper body weightlifting after an earlier route march that day. Multiple sets of ten repetitions each using 0.4Kg weights; arm extensors and flexors. Quite exhausting. Intellectually challenging, too. Everyone in the exercise program had to remember old names and new stories between sets. Not just anyone can do that. You try remembering a new story some time without the weights, if you don't believe me!

My story here is that I am innocent! I never said anyone was trolling. It was the sheerest coincidence that the village overflown somehow seems to have evoked that inference. Honest! Its all a terrible mistake. I thought I could see a flame war coming on, and desperately wanted to rise above it. I never saw any troll, only three billy goats and a bridge, fleetingly. It was only later I realized the identity of the goats.

Let me hasten to advise that there was no typo in the surname of the three billy goats. It was deliberately spelled 'Groff'. Not all may realise that was an open source software joke. 'Groff' is a typesetting package which reads plain text mixed with formatting commands and produces formatted output. See: http://www.gnu.org/software/groff/ . Much the same as some posters read the word 'flame' (or, if you must, phlaigme), mix it with thought-patterns, and output the word 'troll'.

I belatedly endorse examinator's "Introducing topics that are stalking horses for topics that have already been debated ..." as being one characteristic of trolling. Hence my remark, when such is coupled with a short one-line highly provocative statement, about 'trolling in the topics'.
Posted by Forrest Gumpp, Monday, 27 April 2009 5:27:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Forrest Gumpp,
Masterfully stated!
Posted by Psychophant, Monday, 27 April 2009 6:30:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm glad that this thread has given people
a chance to "vent their spleens," so to speak.

That's good.

Perhaps, now, greater understanding and tolerance
will be the result. I certainly hope so.
I'm starting to see that we have to be careful though
not to divide ourselves up in "them," and "us," camps.

We have to try to modify our judgements and stop
accusing each other because this merely encourages
counter-accusations and the result may well be
a complete breakdown in communication.

Just for the record - I did not join OLO to purposely
antagonize people, or be part of any "club," or set
myself up as some sort of "role model."
That's not who I am.

I don't pretend to know all the answers. I definitely
admit to being wrong in the past and have apologised
for it. If I've caused offense - it was never intentional,
and again I apologise for it.

OLO to me is special - because of the people and the
variety of opinions expressed. If that were to change
drastically, I would simply leave.
Nobody needs to be the villains here. We're all adults,
and we should all be capable of (civilized)
dissent opinions over wide-ranging debates.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 27 April 2009 7:35:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kumbaya Foxy!
Posted by Psychophant, Monday, 27 April 2009 8:41:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Psychophant

Trolling with compliments, that's new.

Love the moniker.
Posted by Fractelle, Monday, 27 April 2009 9:05:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fractelle,
You're very kind!
Posted by Psychophant, Monday, 27 April 2009 9:53:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Psychophant,

Go Tell It On The Mountain!
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 12:38:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You know what Psycho pants? When you said I made a brilliant post, I preened at such superb judge of character;-such class and good taste.

But you say it to everyone!! A person can go off people you know.

I am trés miffed.
Posted by Ginx, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 12:50:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Psychophant

Forrest is that you? I reason to believe so from your use of the word in your last post on my discussion thread.
Posted by Fractelle, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 12:53:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Psychopants,
You've made your cynical point it was noted when you made the point under you other pseudonym. Continuing in this vein simple devalues you. Perhaps your alter ego's discussion technique/persona needs more work.
Don't unerestimate a person's smarts on your misinterpretation of what YOU interpret as non genuine. Some of us acknowledge good views even those we don't agree with.
You catch more with honey than turpintine.
I's better to be kind/polite and achieve discussion perchange learn something than to be rude/alienate and learn nothing.
Posted by examinator, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 2:23:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is a site where people make contributions.

This topic is about contributions and labels given to people who make contributions of a certain nature.

Not all 'opinions' are right. Not everything is subjective. If your opinion is that the majority of human beings have three eyes, and my opinion is that they usually have two, then my opinion is right and yours is wrong.

Sometimes there is absolute truth, sometimes there isn't. That is an absolute truth.

Here's another: some people contribute more to a thriving debate than others.

Of course, people can just comment without needing to put much thought into it. But, if they're stirring up hatred, in my opinion they need to be prepared to say why what they're saying has worth.

My definition of a troll is one whose arguments provoke hatred but they have no substance.
(Along with the already-mentioned hallmarks of stalking horses and repetition).
Of course, people often protest being labelled a troll. Their protestations are valid when they can point at valid points they have made to a debate.

So what's a 'valid' point? If I were assessing, I'd say there are four ways to define worth - logic (one point leads to the next in a concise manner), insight (originality of thought), language (well spoken, beautiful use of words) or reference (hard facts from reputable sources).

Topic should be irrelevant in all situations except defamation, vilification or discrimination (all of which have shifting boundaries, granted).
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 3:04:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I've just come across an interesting website:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/magazine/03trolls-t.html

It's The New York Times Magazine article,
"The Trolls Among Us."

Scary stuff - and hopefully it doesn't happen so much
in Oz as it does in the US.

The article tell us that, "Today the Internet is much more
than esoteric discussion forums. It is a mass medium for
defining who we are to ourselves and to others ...

As our emotional investment in the Internet has grown, the
stakes for trolling - for provoking strangers online
have risen."

Apparently the joy of disrupting another's emotional
equilibrium - plays a big part in trolling.

One good thing is that trolling is considered unacceptable
on most Internet sites.

Interesting article. Recommended reading.
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 3:05:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fractelle,

What a relief to find that we are still talking. I was thinking that my most recent post to your discussion thread may have constituted a bridge too far. I trust I made myself sufficiently obscure therein.

Me Psychophant? No way! Yes, I did use the word (decapitalised you will note) in the post to which you have referred, but may I point out that I, too, read many other threads on OLO, and that included this one where so much of this barely concealed branding of some posters as sycophants started to emerge. (Besides which, all my phantasies I believe to be quite healthy ones, even if some might insist they must be all visually cued by female stereotypes in 'men's mags'. Some could be quite wide of the mark.)

I can understand how this chill wind of laconic branding could have been applied to me, as it was earlier in this very thread, with the laconic poster mistaking my good, if somewhat mischievous, humour for malice directed against OLO users and implied support for the known positions of certain posters of which he, Psychophant, does not approve.

I have seen in recent days a definition of trolling as being a breach of online trust, but I have not been able to run the reference to earth, which is why I have not already raised it prior to this post. I value the integrity of my online persona as much as I do my real world integrity. That is why I have never engaged in sockpuppetry. By the same token, I tend not to be too offended if some other user's sockpuppetry is sufficiently transparent, and it is not used to beat the Forum posting limits or attack specific posters.

Literary style is almost unhideable, which is, I suspect why Psychophant is using such brevity of expression. Trolling in the timestamps. Almost original. Supposedly avoiding the posting of sufficient words upon which a judgement as to style could be made.

I applaud certain regular users for their restraint in outing him.

An absolutely capital masquerade, Kumbaya.
Posted by Forrest Gumpp, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 3:05:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
(continued from last post)

Of course, some would reject there is any validity in attempting to discern the worth of comments. My attempts to do so might be judged as elitism.
Evidently they come from the "nothing has more worth than anything else" school of thought.
Hear them cry "fascist! censor! Enemy of free speech! There are no trolls! It's just a tool of the oppressor!"

KMB, this is for you.

If you disagree with what I've said in relation to trolls, say why. If you just want to call me some kind of comment fascist, please tell me if you believe all points are of equal worth.

I'd be obliged if you could put a link to any worthwhile post you have made which fits my classifications. If you can't, please tell me how you'd judge a comment.
Of course, refuse if you wish, but at least go away understanding why I think in some of your posts you've behaved like a troll.

And before you play the victim card, I'd make the point I don't advocate censorship and I've never called for a comment to be banned. I just call a spade a spade, a troll a troll and uninspired worthless comments inciting hatred uninspired worthless comments inciting hatred.

And to those of you who disagree with me or call this pedantry, I say fine - but explain exactly why I'm wrong.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 3:06:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just for the record: I really don't think that PsyP has done anything really awful..
Posted by Ginx, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 3:10:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You're all so kind!
Posted by Psychophant, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 3:55:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'm with Ginx, sycophantic trolling is hilarious.

I thought that I'd successfully 'outed' the sock puppet as Forrest whose florid style would require brevity as camouflage.

BTW
Forrest
I do not always agree with you, in fact I often don't. However, I detect no stink of enmity that I and others attract from a certain clique. I guess it's not so much what you say as how you say it - obtuse, colourful and challenging.
Posted by Fractelle, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 4:34:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
foxey quote<<"The Trolls Among Us."

...The article tell us that,"..is a mass medium for
defining who we are to ourselves and to others ...

As our emotional investment in the Internet has grown,the
stakes for trolling - for provoking strangers online
have risen.">>

this is so true
but not alone strangers
one need not move too far from home for verification of that you quote

a ready egsample is the unbeliever'wolf pack'attacking trav the lone defender left..responding on a topic presumable un-believers couldnt have any worthwhile opinion on, yet clearly they enjoy rebutting a negative..lol..

the topic is no less than the resurection of christ
please observe the last one third of the comments as one believer defends his faith against 4 unbelievers..[who might appear to be winning by weight of numbers alone]

its funny and sad at the same time
so many unbelievers so passionate in spreading their disbelief[,,why?]
well your quote nails it for me

thanks foxey

oh a link to the thread
sure
go feed the trolls
lol
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8830
Posted by one under god, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 7:15:45 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear OUG,

Jonathan Strickland has done an article on
"How Trolls Work,"

http://computer.howstuffworks.com/troll.htm/printable

which may be of further interest to you.

Antonios has complained about the
infringement of "human rights," if trolls were discouraged.
However, I know that Antonios believes that human rights
belong to everyone, not just a select few. I've recently
read about a young man who blew his brains out after being
consistently "trolled," or wound up on the web until he
had a total meltdown. What about his "human rights?"

As the article points out, "trolls are people who take
pleasure in disrupting the conversations and actvities
of others.They find it amusing to wind up another person
until that person cracks up emotionally."

"They lure unsuspecting victims into responding to pointless
or rude questions or statements."

The best reaction towards a troll is to ignore them.
Don't waste time in responding. That is apparently
something that they hate. Of course there are some people
who are simply ill-mannered and aggressive and aren't trolls.
The difficulty lies in being able to tell them apart.

As the article says, "There's no denying that the internet
is an amazing invention. It allows people to communicate
around the world at speeds approaching real time. But this
connection can be a double-edged sword. Not only are you
able to interact with people you like and respect, but you
can also meet people who take pleasure in ..."

You know the rest.
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 28 April 2009 11:37:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy
We do not have trolls in this forum. All members are nice and polite, on the heat we say few words more but this is not trolling.
About the young man who blew his brains out after being
consistently "trolled" I supposed the trolling was the excuse for his act not the cause(reason).
FOXY WHERE IS YOUR TOLERANCE, YOUR UNDERSTANDING?
Do not you see our brothers, our sisters in the forum how good they are?
Foxy when a person search to buy a gun, this person knows in some degree why he wants to buy the gun and how to use it, in the same way when you opened the thread about the troll you thought that may be there is one or more trolls in this forum and probably you was ready to suggest the punishmend of them.
NO FOXY WE DO NOT HAVE TROLLS IN THIS FORUM! IF YOU WANT TO PUNISH A PERSON, THEN PUNISH ME! I AM THE TROLL!
I thanks you very much for your support so many times in the past.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide
Posted by ASymeonakis, Wednesday, 29 April 2009 1:14:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
its sad how people take words to heart,..but i guess some take things serious others not,i like to quote others thus any attack isnt on me[but upon those i quote]

some interesting versions[ways?]of trolling are occuring of late..[the most repititious one seems to be,..why do you post no one reads [so why post a post responding to nothing..lol

[i guess they need to reply but cant rebut what i wrote..so rebut by claiming not to read my posts]..yet their very desire to reply aomething..[anything betrays their very words]..i make a point to read most of the post

[if i cant reply i dont..[or ignore the person]..why waste a post on nothing...lol

i got another non reply..[something about some clever term,meaning in affect not to argue with a stone..[i didnt[couldnt]click on their link but searched the term,..but as usual[for me]..no rebuttal is taken as no response

of course the most common response..[non response is critiqing my poor use of english,..yet not responding a single point of that they claim to not know of nor comprehend..[or not have read or whatever]

i spent the last 20 years researching 16 hours a day,..to become the nutter many presume me to be..[i hate the personal questioning non-reply],..one form of response occasionally asks for me to prove my statement..[but again its only they cant do their own verifications[or think asking for proof is the best rebuttal they can come up with]

anyhow there is no real'trolling'..i think it boils down to peer based point scoring..[..impresing the mates by lording it over the newbie]..the same self known knowns building the [their]-self up by attempting to destroy'the other',while parroting one and other

this has been a better topic than i thought at first..[i love that grayham hasnt revealed his measure of'troll'ing,sort of keeps us all guessing
Posted by one under god, Wednesday, 29 April 2009 1:58:16 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Antonios,

The purpose of this thread is to discuss the subject
of trolling and trolls. It isn't
about personal accusations, or censorship.

As the website I quoted tells us - there are ways of
expressing yourself that won't lead to ruining someone
else's experience while online. Trolls are people who
deliberately aim to disturb communication or ruin
someone else's mood or experience while online.

And, as I clearly stated in my earlier posts - I doubted
whether we had real trolls on this Forum.
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 April 2009 12:37:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
Very succinctly stated!
Posted by Psychophant, Wednesday, 29 April 2009 8:15:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Psychophant,

Your name suits you!

And, I know, - I'm kind!

:)
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 29 April 2009 8:36:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It appears that this thread has run its
course, so I'd like to Thank everyone who
took part in this discussion. I hope that it
was of some use. I know that I learned quite a
bit.

If anyone wants more information, I came across
another site that was useful:

http://www.flayme.com/troll/angler.shtml

"Troll - Angler or Underbridge Dweller?"
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 May 2009 3:57:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 12
  7. 13
  8. 14
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy