Forum function: "Trolls" vs "Sheep?"

Post Reply New Topic

A prominent contemporary source defines "troll" as: "One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument."

As savvy board-users, what is your definition of "troll"? And what is your view on "provocation" as a principle? What is your subjective view on positive and negative in these things?

Being pointedly rude is one thing. However posting provocative and thoughtful commentary--precisely in order to introduce alternate perspectives and to shake up the status quo, which one personally finds unbearable and oppressive? A person with AS (at least as I have and experience it) would be opposed to this, exactly why? Why is the "troll" not an archetype CELEBRATED by the AS community? Literally "the provocative one". And why would social niceties and everyone getting along be an ideal that Aspies would want to adopt, at the expense of the essential and AS-chracteristic ideal of provocation?

Again, clearly there are distinctions between provocation and provocation, "Your mother is ugly!" is clearly stupid provocation. However pointed debate about controversial things--on the basis of rational viewpoints???? Forgive me, but to dismiss such things as "trolling" is frankly a disturbing phenomenon that HAS to be addressed in a community that values such things as intellectual honesty, independence, etc. People--PARTICULARLY DISEMPOWERED PEOPLE--Clearly have to be able to SPEAK without being intimidated about potentially "saying the thing the authorities don't like". This is essential in any forum that is valuable, intellectually honest, and a true social resource (this, as opposed to those that exist simply as inane capitalist enterprises).

I argue that new standards and conceptions are essential. The standard distinction is nonsensical. A "troll" would be essentially anyone who is provocative or who introduces new or revolutionary perspectives... vs a sheep--who would be someone very social, nice and noncontroversial, (which would be the standard view of the NT). So why would we have an ostensibly AS-centric board... which stigmatizes and seeks to restrict specifically AS-centric intellectual or social thinking and interaction types? I don't get this.

There is a difference though between posting something to get a conversation going and posting something just to irritate others. The person playing "devil's advocate" who is hoping to see well thought out responses and opposition is not really a troll. The person who is just goading people for the pleasure of causing irritation to other people is. It's really a matter of intention. One is doing it out of intellectual curiosity and one is doing it out of douchebaggery.

I don't know if there is any history of this issue involved here, so just comment on the face of it.

Yes, I agree with the idea of there being two different types of provocative posting. The difference I think originates with the seriousness of the posters message. With a troll post the message is just a cover for disruption. A controversional post is one where the poster actually is expressing a genuine concern or opinion, but on a touchy subject or in a way that upsets some people. The first type should be treated as malicious and the second allowed, as long as it still follows the basic rules of the forum.

It is easy to get labeled as a 'troublemaker' and even banned for making frequent controversial posts. But one of the factors involved is the nature of the forum community and its interior society. On NT forums at least, over time groups form and they can become very clannish. In such cases, a sort of double standard develops were an insider can get away with being more provocative (or trollish) then a newcomer or outsider. I have sometimes identified a specific type personality on forums I call the 'House Troll'. This is a very popular and also biting person who can troll with relative impunity, as long as it is on a newb or outsider. One of the reasons it continues is because some clannish members consider this entertaining and a welcome break in the routine.

Whatever happens here, I hope everyone's rights are considered on an even playing field. It has been shown in studies that 'Fairness' is actually the most important aspect to individuals of any communal forms (ie, work, residences, organizations). People actually feel worse about being treated unfairly then being physically injured. In other words a person gets over breaking their leg rather quickly, but being unjustly overlooked for promotion will hurt worse mentally and its effects last a very long time.

As someone who occasionally bans trolls from this site; my definition also includes the posting history of the member rather than one-off provocative posts. Usually trolls are obvious to spot because very few (if any) of their posts are participatory rather than provocative. Occasionally there are more sophisticated trolls but I'm not saying anything about how I spot them (trade secrets )

Thanks TallyMan, and I really want to like you But I find it impossible to like the authoritarian idea that particular people "tend the herd". This validates the idea of the "herd" as the default institution. Personally I would like to ask, could you advise me on this (I'm being very forthright and sincere, I'm looking for serious feedback)? I'm as AS-diagnosed adult and I'm VERY interested in talking to other AS-diagonsed people--particularly in the sense of sharing IDEAS to see how my personal way of thinking relates to that of other AS people. I don't want to be rude. I don't want people to hate me--obviously. But I also don't want to bullied, threatened, etc, and I find in my short history here that this kind of thing goes on, just as it does anywhere else. I am of a kind of personality that I simply will not endure this kind of thing. I find when I try to address these problems my hands are tied. When I don't? The go on, and on, and on--so I can't "win" either way. I don't know what do to. I'm very frustrated with my situation here. I've tried to get guidance from other moderators, but they simply refuse to respond to me. I am trying to figure out if there is going to be a way that is successful for me to function here. I would like there to be one, but I cannot force that if it's not to be.

This all leaves me feeling like a target here--no different than in any NT-based forum I've ever operated within. LIke it's "Me" vs "The mob of angry pitchfork-bearing villagers": "Haidouk bad!"

Perhaps you could advise me in a positive way? If you could do this it would be immensely appreciated, and beneficial to me.

I suppose that my naive expectation was that WP would be a forum that unlike others I've experienced, was entirely idea-focused and was not plagued by things like personality conflicts, and so on. But I guess people are as they are. One of my features is that I will argue with people. This is not me being a #$%^ -- this is the way my mind works, and the way I interact on ideas that mean a lot to me: I will argue with people if my idea makes more sense to me than theirs. This simply cannot be taken as "gratuitous negativity". This is an entire human perspective. One cannot simply "outlaw" pessimism. The impulse to do that, and to simultaneously try to operate as honest and conscientious--this just doesn't add up in my head.

If you could PM me about any of these things, as you see them, that would be fantastic! The thing is, I'm not going to stay here and grind my wheels. I have some self respect. But I'd like to be here. I don't say things, originate threads, etc, unless i find particular value to them--regardless of whether or not that value is popular, or particularly "upbeat". However I feel quite beset because of my overall experience, and I'm trying to guage whether it's worth it for me to actually try to participate here, or whether I should just leave.. If it's inevitable that they're going to get rid of me, I'd really prefer to not waste my time. How do I know if this is inevitable or not however??? No one will even talk to me about about it in a simple, straightforward, respectful way. That is all I ask. Thanks in advance!! !

Trolls are sheep within their own circle as well. Phrases like "U mad bro?" have been copied time and time again by so-called trolls. There is no originality, hence, trolls are also sheep, just of a different flock.

I pretty much agree with what you're saying here.

Let me just say that I don't find the word "troll" productive and hesitate to use it. I have been both ganged up on and driven out of forums (presumably, because I was identified as "the monster/troll") but also I have experienced the cliquish, non-idea based attacks by others (in this case, they would be the "trolls", I would think). "Troll" is a kind of meaningless pejorative, as I see it. One has to address WHAT is actually going on. If someone is reacting, WHAT exactly are they reacting to? Have they been ganged up on? If so WHY? Is what they're saying that people don't like and want to get rid of SUBSTANTIAL, or trivial pretext? These things are very complicated. I think the word "troll" and policy based on that concept is inherrently inadequate and trite. It's an easy label people use when they can't actually articulate what's going on. "Woo there is a conflict--the 'troll' caused it!" Ha! Its really a sad phenomenon, imho. And I think substance has to be factored in. If someone is simply of a disagreeable personality but they THINK and CONTRIBUTE, you know what? I WANT that person present and I WANT to hear what they have to say. We're not all perfect. If people in an AS forum don't appreciate that fact, I don't know where there is hope for it being appreciated anywhere. We're not all positive-thinkers. We're not all social butterflies. There's more to the spectrum of humanity than such social lubricators.

I would say that I ENTIRELY agree about your last point. FAIRNESS and conscientious evenhandedness are essential. If you want to let people argue with each other... FINE! I can deal with that perfectly well. If you DON'T want to let people argue with each other? I might not do as well, but at least I can figure out what's going on. BUT when you let some people bully others, and apply standards in a subjective way? This doesn't work--it invites nonproductive conflict. Because it FRUSTRATES people.

@haidouk: The moderators simply work enforcing the site rules and terms of service. Members are expected to observe those rules of behaviour on the site. It is quite simple really. A simplified version of the rules is:
Don't make direct personal attacks on other members or call them nasty names - however, you can disagree with their ideas, comments and beliefs.

A site such as this needs rules and moderators to enforce those rules simply to ensure civility. To use your metaphor - ensure the occasional wolf doesn't go around attacking and devouring the sheep. In that sense you can think of moderators as shepherds!

I totally agree. Most forums have a straight-jacket attitude to controversial opinions, no matter how intelligent or individual people on the forum claim to be. All forums have a party line that's it's not hard to cross if the debate is more interesting to you than making friends.

I like to provoke debate and can sometimes be too facetious in my comments but I'm usually only trying to get a decent conversation going or expressing my ideas or sense of humour, which people often seem to dislike. I can't do the 'oh yes I agree with what everyone else is saying' thing and actively seek to find new angles to approach things from. This has not gone down well for me on forums. Should I pretend to be someone I'm not though?

I have to say though that the moderators on here are a lot more open minded than on other forums I've been on.

I have noticed though that conflicting views expressed in a passionate way do seem to unnerve most people and they often try and shut the debate down, even if they themselves don't want to take part in it. I find this very irritating and 'dog in a manger'-type behaviour.

that would be a /b/tard, not a troll.

One statement I have heard frequently on NT forums is something to the effect of: 'I like to think we have a very opened minded people here.' When I hear that I cringe inwardly and think 'No! You don't! Nobody has!' It's a personnel opinion, but I think nearly all folks are closed minded to varying degree. But not being able to see that about themselves will make them rationalize a way to oppose what they don't like and believe it logical and just. The dissenting voice is drowned out or silenced and the dissenter ostricized or cast out of the community.

I haven't been here long enough to see the full picture, but my initial impression is quite favorable as far as allowing a very wide range of opinion and on subjects that are considered elsewhere too contraversial. I may not participate in many, but I am glad to see them there. I was on one very large and well established forum that due to the forum interest area contained primarily older and well read members. And they were petrified of even the slightest arguement, so no politics, no religion, no mature themes, no social issues, no critisim (except in academic form)... etc. Yet they continually bragged about what an open minded and fun loving bunch they were. What was really ironic was that at the same time I was on another large forum with primarily very young people and it was hard to find a thread that was not on a contraversial subject. So apparently its mostly the immature that can discuss mature themes reasonably.

I totally agree. I could write a book about all the run-ins I've had with forum lynch mobs lol
A group of people (any group of people) like nothing better than to get those torches lit!
Heretic and witch burning was always a crowd pleaser - once you understand that this is the essential mindset of the majority of humans, you will understand forums perfectly.
I agree though that this is a good forum - far more tolerant of difference than any others I've been on.

Indeed.
Most the trolls I've come across and had to remove from places tend to be under the age of 14(the site I work for has plenty of young programmers aged I think 10+).
Usually they are around the age of 13-ish, but I suppose that's okay, most people look back at the posts they made when they were 13 and there is always a couple things to regret.
Of course, then there is the occasional older person who still finds it funny.

I've been trolled before, it's just no fun!

COUGH! COUGH! COUGH!

Excuse me!

This thread is thick with smoke- what with all of you burning martyrs here!

Well...give us some examples of your saintliness- and "revolutionary ideas".

Show us your miraculous stuff.

Maybe we will canonize you.

I don't do miracles for sceptics

My response here will be pretty simple compared to the 1s so far. I'm not a deep thinker & these questions are complicated. Anyways... I've been accused of being a troll on other forums in the past because I posted controversial topics when I was upset. I ranted alot about things because posting was a way for me to help analyze & sort things out. i didn't explain myself well sometimes(or lots of times) members took things the wrong way; they assumed I meant or was implying things or that I was intentionally trying to disagree with them for the sake of arguing when I was really trying to sort things out with myself. They told me things that I took personally & I tried to argue/explain but said the wrong thing & then they become upset with me. I unintentionally caused controversy on post others started partly because of my negative history; they took things I said the wrong way that they wouldn't of for others because of their impression of me. I said things that caused other members to disagree with each other which caused problems that really wasn't my intent & then they sort of thought I was internally casing problems & I got the label of troll.
My personal definition of a troll is someone who does things like attacking/flaming/insulting other members; spreading negative lies or rumors about members or the owners/admin/webmasters; violating forum rules for kicks like making post they know will get deleted or bragging about how they got warned or how they caused problems.