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

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."

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.

Dear woulfe,

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

Thanks.

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?

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