<Trollish Post>

Post Reply New Topic

You good for nothing lousy wart! I attack you!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!111111111111

1 PWN U n00b5.

.
.
.

[size=0]I'm not serious here AG, just a joke. [/size]

Nice, Keet... *chuckle*

I'm not sure what more explanation you need - help? When someone continues to post in an effort to instigate further furor and upset without contribution, then it seems fairly evident... even if the intent is not there, the effect is.

[edit] I think part of the confusion is that a single event doesn't prove anything in all but the most overt cases - at least to me. A pattern of behavior... starting threads designed to create conflict without contributing further to any of them could be a definition; returning to a thread time and again to incite a response vs. having a response could be another. If you're looking for a smoking gun, I don't think I can help. [/edit]


M.

Last edited by makuranososhi on 06 Apr 2009, 2:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hmm, I happen to think the T word get's thrown around far too lightly these days, and that it's not one particular thing that makes someone a troll, but more a pattern of behavior. To give one example, I'm a member of another forum made up of pizza delivery drivers, the forum is advertised as a place that we can let off steam about our jobs off the clock. Periodically, someone will show up and post something to the effect of "you're all a bunch of losers, if your job sucks so much why don't you quit?", and if we ever get a second post, it's usually something like "you guys are just mad cause I totally just pwned the board, etc etc". THAT, is a troll, someone who's sole purpose in being there is too piss everyone off. To give another example, through that same pizza board I'm a member of a forum owned by a pizza restaurant magazine that's mostly populated by shop owners, where I provide an employee's perspective on running a pizzeria, and am often accused of trolling there because my opinions often clash with the rest of the forum members'. Not the same thing, I'm not there for the purpose of pissing people off, even though I'm posting in hostile territory and things often get combative. I think trolls are kind of like obscenity, you can't really lay down specifics, but you know one when you see one.

All of them!

Troller Derby Queen, round and round, go round and round topic

Some trollish behaviour is the bait and run variety, and some involves sticking around posting something annoying. How and if you respond determines the next chess (troll move), to paraphrase makuransoshi.

Right, actually the closer to a smoking gun we get the better. After all, the closer we get to something like that, the more we can get a relatively substantive definition.

But, from what I can see, here are your measure: a pattern of behavior that involves posts that violate courtesy norms to extreme extent, without providing additional bits of relevant information to a discussion. Is that correct? Or would you add more to the definition?

Obviously an insult to Orwell is the primary definition of troll, though some others (such as ALL CAPS, poor grammar, etc) are indirectly insults to Orwell by being unsatisfactory to him. Insults to other people are just amusing, but do not qualify as trolling unless they include one or more other displeasing component.

You're only a troll if you are a furry beast who kills people that walk over the bridge you live under.

Contrary to popular belief, the troll of Norse Mythology actually took the appearance of a human who tricked people to do bad things. A bit like internet trolls.

Well the troll of Norse mythology doesn't speak for all of us.

I have always had trouble understanding it, or even why it is considered bad.

Well, it sometimes is like having bullies in school call you out and make insinuative or otherwise insulting comments. Sometimes it is like having a neighbor play that Spanish version of Polka on their stereo with the bass cranked to the maximum. Sometimes it is like having a never ending supply of forwarded messages in your inbox.

The way I see it, there are rules on this site which cover all of those things. If someone is within the rules, what is wrong with being provocative? I see writing on this site all the time which I think would fit makuranososhi's previous description of trolling, but do not see them to be any great offense.

Claire333: That there is grey area, I do not argue - and if you find threads that violate that are an issue, I ask that you let myself or another moderator know. I'm in favor of provoking thought - not goading others into reactions, and there is a difference.

AG: Unfortunately I don't think I can give a pixel-width line in the sand to give an absolute definition, and any I do provide is mine from reading the rules and conversations regarding them. Someone who repeatedly enters threads and posts off-subject with the purpose of inciting other members - that's pretty clear cut. Harassing another member is also another example, whether in one thread or following them around the site. While I am apt to make a comment when someone is veering off-course, I'm not as likely to formally warn someone if it simply a matter of being zealous or trying to make a point but doing so in a rough manner. Most folks have responded well; those who have not have at times continued and we have had to discuss the problem more formally. Some people naturally cause a stir, and that's ok by me - it's when their target falls on a person or segment of society instead of an act or point of view that my attention is wrested away and focused on that issue. I think the term is used too freely in public, thrown around too easily for my comfort - some people just don't follow rules, which is their decision... but so are the consequences.

So, to informally restate: a pattern of behavior that violates site policy and etiquette to an extreme and interferes, agitates, or insults individuals or groups with the intent of causing turmoil. I think that's inclusive enough?


M.

I am more concerned with specificity. The reason is that I want something that includes and excludes sufficiently to be somewhat analytic. Squishiness is something I am trying to avoid, as I recognize that we conceive of our world in squishy manners, I am trying to find something relatively analytic within the system, so that way this isn't an arbitrary atop arbitrary things.

I can understand "insult" kind of clearly as this is a defiance of social norms, and WP rules. I suppose by interfere or agitate, there is an overlap between a deficit of thread-advancing information and extreme violations of social norms. As well, by intent, you measure by the lack of change in relationship to effective communications by you or another credible person to the troll to stop the undesirable behavior?

I think this is what I needed. Thanks.