Otoki said:
Yeah. I mean, anyone who remembers the TotalMucci could say that not all trolls are out to get a rise out of people. Some of them are just idiots who don't understand how rude, offensive, and stupid they're being.
But then they're just rude, offensive idiots. An Internet troll is, by definition, someone who engages in such behavior with the primary intent of pissing people off and being generally disruptive.
It's one thing to try to have a discussion with someone who isn't good at arguing, lacks knowledge, is misinformed, and is otherwise annoying, but who has a genuine interest and is speaking in good faith. Or even with someone who is good at arguing, knowledgeable, etc. and just unintentionally pisses you off anyway.
But it's quite another to try to discuss a topic with someone who's intentionally sabotaging the debate because he finds it amusing to do so.
Otoki said:
Yeah. I mean, anyone who remembers the TotalMucci could say that not all trolls are out to get a rise out of people. Some of them are just idiots who don't understand how rude, offensive, and stupid they're being.
But then they're just rude, offensive idiots. An Internet troll is, by definition, someone who engages in such behavior with the primary intent of pissing people off and being generally disruptive.
It's one thing to try to have a discussion with someone who isn't good at arguing, lacks knowledge, is misinformed, and is otherwise annoying, but who has a genuine interest and is speaking in good faith. Or even with someone who is good at arguing, knowledgeable, etc. and just unintentionally pisses you off anyway.
But it's quite another to try to discuss a topic with someone who's intentionally sabotaging the debate because he finds it amusing to do so.
I disagree. I recently had someone who was completely ignorant and offensive in my strip club group. He wasn't trying to piss anyone off, but he was a troll anyway. Why? Because there was absolutely no hope of making him see reason. If you don't believe me I'll send you the relevant link.
This seems like the best time and place for me to publicly commend Otoki for being a stalwart in the stemming of trolling. She certainly helps me remember I shouldn't go yard on the latest "scratchings" (wink wink) of whichever troll happened to flail a limb above the bridge.
Otoki said:
I disagree. I recently had someone who was completely ignorant and offensive in my strip club group. He wasn't trying to piss anyone off, but he was a troll anyway. Why? Because there was absolutely no hope of making him see reason. If you don't believe me I'll send you the relevant link.
Trolling does NOT require intent.
There's not really anything to disagree about. As infuriating as your guy might be, the term "internet troll" has an accepted definition, and it requires intent. You'll have to find another word to use for what you're describing. I suggest "moron."
An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion. [emphasis added]
Trolling is a deliberate, bad faith attempt to disrupt the editing of Wikipedia. Ignorance is not trolling. Genuine dissent is not trolling. Biased editing, even if defended aggressively, is in itself not trolling. By themselves, misguided nominations, votes, and proposed policy are not trolling. They are only trolling when they are motivated by a program of malice rather than ignorance or bias.
Toku666 said:
This seems like the best time and place for me to publicly commend Otoki for being a stalwart in the stemming of trolling. She certainly helps me remember I shouldn't go yard on the latest "scratchings" (wink wink) of whichever troll happened to flail a limb above the bridge.
Thanks. It mostly comes from me learning my mistake by fanning the fires in the past.
Otoki said:
I disagree. I recently had someone who was completely ignorant and offensive in my strip club group. He wasn't trying to piss anyone off, but he was a troll anyway. Why? Because there was absolutely no hope of making him see reason. If you don't believe me I'll send you the relevant link.
Trolling does NOT require intent.
There's not really anything to disagree about. As infuriating as your guy might be, the term "internet troll" has an accepted definition, and it requires intent. You'll have to find another word to use for what you're describing. I suggest "moron."
An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion. [emphasis added]
Trolling is a deliberate, bad faith attempt to disrupt the editing of Wikipedia. Ignorance is not trolling. Genuine dissent is not trolling. Biased editing, even if defended aggressively, is in itself not trolling. By themselves, misguided nominations, votes, and proposed policy are not trolling. They are only trolling when they are motivated by a program of malice rather than ignorance or bias.
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.
Well, I'll have to add this to the definition, then, because when you tell a woman that she should gain weight in order to fit an item of clothing, the effect is the same as that of a troll posting that remark.
Toku666 said:
This seems like the best time and place for me to publicly commend Otoki for being a stalwart in the stemming of trolling. She certainly helps me remember I shouldn't go yard on the latest "scratchings" (wink wink) of whichever troll happened to flail a limb above the bridge.
Thanks. It mostly comes from me learning my mistake by fanning the fires in the past.
Otoki said:
I disagree. I recently had someone who was completely ignorant and offensive in my strip club group. He wasn't trying to piss anyone off, but he was a troll anyway. Why? Because there was absolutely no hope of making him see reason. If you don't believe me I'll send you the relevant link.
Trolling does NOT require intent.
There's not really anything to disagree about. As infuriating as your guy might be, the term "internet troll" has an accepted definition, and it requires intent. You'll have to find another word to use for what you're describing. I suggest "moron."
An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion. [emphasis added]
Trolling is a deliberate, bad faith attempt to disrupt the editing of Wikipedia. Ignorance is not trolling. Genuine dissent is not trolling. Biased editing, even if defended aggressively, is in itself not trolling. By themselves, misguided nominations, votes, and proposed policy are not trolling. They are only trolling when they are motivated by a program of malice rather than ignorance or bias.
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.
Well, I'll have to add this to the definition, then, because when you tell a woman that she should gain weight in order to fit an item of clothing, the effect is the same as that of a troll posting that remark.
I'd also like to piggyback my post with a reminder of the threads Total Mucci started. Do you remember him? I highly doubt that he was trying to troll, he was just clueless, idiotic, and blamed others for his ignorance (if you don't educate me, how will I learn?) which is just a bullshit attempt to excuse one's idiotic opinions with an ignorance that can be easily fixed through doing a few minutes of research.
His posts had the same effect as purposeful trolling.
Is it just me or has the CE boards died since all the right wing trolls left. I mean it was getting bad, but now it just sucks. Is there a happy medium somewhere?
Pip said:
Is it just me or has the CE boards died since all the right wing trolls left. I mean it was getting bad, but now it just sucks. Is there a happy medium somewhere?
If by died you mean "doesn't have as many pointless, circular, stupid discussions going on", then yes, yes it has died.
If by died you mean "has no interesting discussions going on" I'd say no.
Pip said:
Is it just me or has the CE boards died since all the right wing trolls left. I mean it was getting bad, but now it just sucks. Is there a happy medium somewhere?
If by died you mean "doesn't have as many pointless, circular, stupid discussions going on", then yes, yes it has died.
If by died you mean "has no interesting discussions going on" I'd say no.
At the risk of sounding like an old man shaking his fist at youngins' riding by on their bikes: It is much less compelling compared to the days of old. And I know that it is not just nostalgia speaking in this case. Not as many posts, not as many interesting topics, not as many posters in general. Every thread is filled with the usual suspects, it seems. Interesting posts get marginal comment counts, and even high-count threads seem to lack both substance and entertainment value.
It reminds me of the cyclical lulls in student performance / engagement that those of us who teach experience every few years. Wax and wane and wax, again.
Or maybe, after eight years of posting, everyone interesting has finally said their piece?
Pip said:
Is it just me or has the CE boards died since all the right wing trolls left. I mean it was getting bad, but now it just sucks. Is there a happy medium somewhere?
If by died you mean "doesn't have as many pointless, circular, stupid discussions going on", then yes, yes it has died.
If by died you mean "has no interesting discussions going on" I'd say no.
At the risk of sounding like an old man shaking his fist at youngins' riding by on their bikes: It is much less compelling compared to the days of old. And I know that it is not just nostalgia speaking in this case. Not as many posts, not as many interesting topics, not as many posters in general. Every thread is filled with the usual suspects, it seems. Interesting posts get marginal comment counts, and even high-count threads seem to lack both substance and entertainment value.
It reminds me of the cyclical lulls in student performance / engagement that those of us who teach experience every few years. Wax and wane and wax, again.
Or maybe, after eight years of posting, everyone interesting has finally said their piece?
Don't worry. The "entertainment" will increase when the next election draws nigh.
Pip said:
Is it just me or has the CE boards died since all the right wing trolls left. I mean it was getting bad, but now it just sucks. Is there a happy medium somewhere?
If by died you mean "doesn't have as many pointless, circular, stupid discussions going on", then yes, yes it has died.
If by died you mean "has no interesting discussions going on" I'd say no.
At the risk of sounding like an old man shaking his fist at youngins' riding by on their bikes: It is much less compelling compared to the days of old. And I know that it is not just nostalgia speaking in this case. Not as many posts, not as many interesting topics, not as many posters in general. Every thread is filled with the usual suspects, it seems. Interesting posts get marginal comment counts, and even high-count threads seem to lack both substance and entertainment value.
Absolutely.
I have wondered for many months whether it has been deliberate site policy to deprecate the CE board. I'd say that the appointing of UpTight as a Politics Editor was a bad sign, and the appearance of FearTheReaper was the start of a general degradation of the board.
[fair+balanced edit] I suppose it may have been unrelated; pure coincidence.
[fair+balanced edit] Or, perhaps, it may be that the management doesn't care that much. Why should they, after all; so long as the business is making money.
lil_tuffy said:
In the example you're talking about, I deleted every post but one in that thread because you and/or your comment sent it spiraling off into irrelevancy before the topic reached an entire page. I basically, reset the thread.
Apparently, you're too self-centered and delusional to realize that those actions and this thread are intended to help maintain focus on the discussion as opposed to senseless attacks on those posting.
would it not be easier to remove people who have, time and time again, proven themselves incapable of posting anything but inflammatory crap, than it is to allow it but tell everyone else to not take the bait?
Agreed. There is a regular writer here who is a troll and makes personal attacks when you disagree with him.
I'm a newbie here, and accidently fed him. I won't be reading his stuff for now on.
But seriously, it would make more sense to remove people who write nothing but inflammatory crap instead of telling everyone else not to take the bait.
SockPuppet
I'm lost
July 2006
APR 30, 2009 05:04 PM