My favourite definition of "trolling,"
that I found on the web is:

"Being a prick on the internet because you can..."

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.

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

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.

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.

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.