39
   

Trolls, or trolling behaviour ...how do we deal with these isues as an online community?

 
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 04:45 pm
@djjd62,
Quote:
i'm sorry, i can't help it

i was raised by wolves


Keyser Soze...is that you?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  4  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 05:31 pm
@wandeljw,

wandeljw wrote:


Having read the comments, the answer to the thread title may be that it is behavior that we each must deal with individually and in an "ad hoc" manner. The problem with the thread title is the phrase, "as an online community". We can't deal with it that way because definitions of trolling are different for each of us.
[/qu
ote]

I haven't made it through the entire thread yet, but has anyone offered a definition of a "troll?"

Back in the Abuzz days there were people who clogged up threads with incredibly long and nonsensical posts; repeated ad nauseum. It was clear their only objective was to make discussion of a given topic impossible. With every warning to "scroll, scroll, scroll," they simply increased the number of their gibbering posts. Eventually they killed Abuzz.

That's what I consider hijacking a thread, and to me that is a Troll.

Is a Troll someone who enters a thread with a post that is entirely irrelevant to the originating topic?

A single intrusion doesn't seem to be much of a problem and it can't, in and of itself, take the thread in a new direction unless others respond and a back and forth ensues.

Are the responders Trolls? Is it really so horrible to take a thread in a different direction?

If the original question or point can't sustain a discussion, irrespective of a couple of sidetracks, how interesting could it have been?

Is a Troll someone who enters a thread and disputes a stated point in a smart-ass, snotty, or belligerent manner? If so, I'm a Troll and I am Legion. This definition of a Troll seems to be in the eye of the beholder, because what is snotty to one members seems to be biting wit to another. The definition of Troll, as used on A2K, seems often to require the Troll hold opposing views.

There used to be an vile character on Abuzz who called himself Marburg (like the deadly virus). Marburg was nothing but an oozing pustule on the Abuzz body. All of his posts were designed to shock and outrage, but because they consistently represented a left-wing view (albeit in an entirely extreme manner) he had his apologists and defenders among even the most civil of left-wing members.

People who would have gladly joined a lynching party to hang Massagatto, expressed the opinion that while Marburg was extreme, he had a right to his opinions.

There is no Marburg, of the right or of the left, that I can find on A2K. There are no miscreants either who have the ability to choke a thread and this forum to death.

What's left, for the most part, are people who can, easily, be ignored if they offend or bore.

Personalized censoring works.

With the ability to ignore, there is no need for monitors or Community Action.

If, on the other hand, you want to keep everyone on your topic, post a good one and shepherd the flock.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 05:46 pm
@hawkeye10,
There is no "factual basis" to dispute. You speculate, but you demonstrate no facts.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 05:55 pm
@dlowan,
dlowan wrote:
And what you "see" remains factually wrong.

The thumbs up is NOT "only reactive to the thumbs down" and the thumbs down is not JUST "essentially an internet equivalent of putting one's fingers in one's ears and saying "la-la-la-la, i can't hear you."

I agree that it may often be USED that way, though.


This is arrogance personified. I am the only one who can state what i "factually" see--and that is how i see people using these functions. I was speaking specifically about how they are used. Your comments have no relevance to what i have posted.
JPB
 
  3  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 08:10 pm
@panzade,
panzade wrote:

But the biggest cause of thread buggering is verbal bullying and the Usual Suspects come to mind. These are the alpha-dogs who mark their territory by pissing on threads with bullying posts. Are there any female bullies? I can't think of one. Perhaps you can.


I can think of one. I usually just roll my eyes at her posts but her pokes at RP on this thread made me laugh out loud.
2PacksAday
 
  3  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 08:34 pm
@Region Philbis,
RP said to David

"gotta read the fine print..."


I actually laughed out loud.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 08:52 pm
@panzade,
Quote:
Are there any female bullies? I can't think of one. Perhaps you can.


Good lord, yes! I don't want to mention any names but there're a couple posting right on this thread.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Mon 22 Mar, 2010 09:27 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
This is arrogance personified. I am the only one who can state what i "factually" see--and that is how i see people using these functions. I was speaking specifically about how they are used. Your comments have no relevance to what i have posted.


This is an interesting point. If one is expressing an opinion of how something works, how people are using something, does that immediately make it a fact?

In order for it to be a fact, would there not have to be some study that specifically measured whether said personal opinion was actually the fact, Jack?
0 Replies
 
margo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 12:10 am
@djjd62,
djjd62 wrote:

i, on the other hand, was raised by the pack with mange


Laughing wonderful line! (or lion!)
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 12:10 am
@JPB,
JPB wrote:
panzade wrote:

But the biggest cause of thread buggering is verbal bullying and the Usual Suspects come to mind. These are the alpha-dogs who mark their territory by pissing on threads with bullying posts. Are there any female bullies? I can't think of one. Perhaps you can.


I can think of one. I usually just roll my eyes at her posts but her pokes at RP on this thread made me laugh out loud.
Anyone can be held to account for whatever he says, or she says.
Most of the time (not all the time, depending on severity of the offense), I tend to give chicks a break.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  5  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 01:08 am
@Setanta,
Whatever.
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  3  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 01:11 am
scrolling scrolling scrolling
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 01:47 am
@Region Philbis,
Region Philbis wrote:

gotta read the fine print...

...... http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/8387/70302123.jpg
Region, how can u make a red arrow, like that ?
msolga
 
  2  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 02:00 am
@msolga,
I'd like to add a bit of clarification to my post from earlier in the day, if that's OK. In an analogy between school bullies & cyber bullies, I said:

Quote:
Possibly a life-long work habit of interacting with bullies in such ways has influenced how I interact with people in general? (Actually I do believe that most people have redeeming qualities.) So perhaps that's how come I find myself interacting with trolls (in my "lovely" way Wink ) when some sort of reasoned interaction is actually possible?


If I have given you the impression that I find cyber bullying understandable, or acceptable because I believe all people have a few "redeemable qualities", that's not actually what I think at all. Yes, I have engaged in exchanges with a couple of what I'd call "trolls" here & yes, I've found they did have their redeemable qualities. However those exchanges contributed in no way to changing their online behaviour in the long-term toward others, nor toward any actual respect for the intended thread subject. I no longer have any interest in engaging with them at all.

I would describe their online behaviour as persistently vicious (often personal) goading of those who they "objected to", acting collectively & individually (like an unpleasant little posse) to deliberately derail particular threads. While having very little of real substance to actually contribute to the subject of the threads. In the meantime, acting as if they were being denied a proper say.

Now, to me, that sort of behaviour & attitude is not at all surprising in adolescents going through their rough patches, but is completely inexplicable & abhorrent in "grown-ups" Online or offline.



msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 02:12 am
@panzade,
Quote:
This thread would have been better titled Bullies, Trolls and Trolling Behaviour msolga. IMO


Yes, in retrospect, that would have been a more appropriate title, panzade.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 02:27 am
@msolga,
why do I get the feeling that to you all behaviour that is not prim/proper/polite is bullying???

Some people, especially men, are prone to forcefully expressing their views. This is not a character flaw, this is how real people are, and always have been.

it is the exact same thing that has so many deemed to be trolls...this attaching of negative labels. All those who do not conform must be demeaned, diminished, and encouraged to either conform or else go away.
msolga
 
  3  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 02:30 am
@hawkeye10,
"Forceful" is something quite different to irrational & malicious.
And bullying.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 02:41 am
@msolga,
the lack of consensus that fair fight is a requirement is troubling, but with you I sense an aversion to even even sharp elbows, much less any fighting. Real people fight, if they give a **** anyways......normally.
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  5  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 03:19 am
Real people listen to other opinions and make their own judgements on whether there is any value in those opinions.

Trolls do not accept any other opinion and refuse to listen to well founded arguments. When they realise that their opinions are not being accepted they tend to disolve into name calling vitriol, trying to discredit other respondants.


Hawkeye
i believe there may also be a cultural divide here as well. Your point about putting a point agressivly or forcefully can be percieved as being abrasive. I have encountered this in person from Americans I know. Although I do not have a great deal of experience with other cultures It has been my experience that Americans can be extreemly abrasive with their views and refuse to accept that there can be another point of view.
saab
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2010 03:35 am
@dadpad,
Although I do not have a great deal of experience with other cultures It has been my experience that Americans can be extreemly abrasive with their views and refuse to accept that there can be another point of view.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abrasive is that what I would call a "besserwisser"?
If it is so, I would say these kind of people excists in every nation, more in some than in others.
The Americans I know are often more polite than not, Danes are much more direct in expressing their views than a Swede ever would dare to be.
A Besserwisser is not really bulluing - all you can do is to let them have the last word.
 

Related Topics

OBVIOUS TROLL - Question by Setanta
The Trolls Among Us - Discussion by Robert Gentel
When Shutting Up isn't Cowardice - Discussion by Thomas
Stop responding to trolls - Question by maxdancona
According to American Scientist... - Discussion by McGentrix
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 12:03:43