Tracking and revealing the trolls....ok or not?

@Frank Apisa,

You're right, bloke doesn't have negative connotations and neither did chavvie or chav when I first heard it in Kent.

Limey doesn't really upset us, it reminds us of preventing scurvy and our naval heritage.

0 Replies

When we get mad at each other in this forum,
there is a lot of accusation of being trolls among ourselves.

Its like being a troll = being disliked
(tho that is not what the dictionary says).

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

That's actually a good point. Some trolls are obvious to everyone -- this guy (in the video) seems to be unambiguously trollish. But where is the line? Who decides?

1 Reply

@sozobe,

The decision is made by the accuser that gets mad.

I earnestly mean what I have said (unless I'm kidding around, in good humor), but over the years,
I 've been accused of being a troll (because of my support of freedom of self defense)
almost as ofen as I 've been accused of idiocy or of being "hi-lar-i-ous".

1 Reply

There is something deliciously appealing about outing assholes. I heard last night on the news that the westboro church is up to their trollish behavior again, they will attend the funeral of those two poor wee boys who were killed by their dad. They plan to picket it in their disgust over the California judge finding the ban on gay marriage unconstitutional. I don't have a problem with differing points of view, but I do find these type of actions offensive. They offer nothing to the conversation except pure ugliness.
I've recently noticed that many newspaper up here won't allow lettres to the editor or comment unless you align it with your facebook page. While I understand that not everybody has a facebook page and my find this frustrating.. it forces most people to put their money where their mouth is. You run the risk of negative feedback if you're a public prick.
As witnesses in the recent riots in Vancouver, if you do something horrible in public, it will mostly likely come back to haunt you. So maybe, in this modern era, public shaming will keep the trolls from being too disgusting, put a muzzle on them. That being said, is the news channel responsible for any possible vigilantism.? Sometimes one thing leads to another...

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

Actually, almost any of us who defend our positions with vehemence eventually gets called a troll.

I certainly been called a troll many times...and I suspect each of us has had an instance or several.

I certainly try never to be the kind of vicious troll that guy in the video apparently is being...but I (and many others here) have the tenacity of a bull dog.

Screw it. If someone wants to think of me as a troll...or wants to call me a troll...let 'em.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

That was interesting. He turned out to be exactly like his posts. Asshole in posts, asshole in person.

It makes you wonder if people's internet "appearance" is a more revealing view of them than their real world appearance.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I dissent. I use troll to indicate that the person in question is trying to make the discussion about themselves and/or their obsession. I may not like what you say, but i've never thougth of you as a troll. If you showed up in a thread about child care, and tried to start a discussion of agnosticism and the excellence of your understanding; if you showed up in a thead about revolt in the Arab world and tried to start a discussion of agnosticism and the excellence of your understanding--then i'd consider you to be trolling. David isn't necessarily a troll, but he trolls with his gun obsession very often. If the topic is not guns, ranting about guns is inappropriate.

3 Replies

@Setanta,

I agree, I never thought of Frank as a troll. Annoying, yes, hi, Frank, but never a troll, not at all.

I think of David as obsessing, not really meaning to troll in some strict sense but sometimes generating that effect. Sort of a cue propensity. He's part of us.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Trolling is posting for the sake of pissing people off.

Frank pissing people off is collateral damage.

Wink

1 Reply

@dlowan,

Urban Dictionary troll definitions:

Quote:

troll

1. troll

One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument

2. troll

One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the essence of the issue.

3. troll

1a. Noun
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument.

1b. Noun
A person who, on a message forum of some type, attacks and flames other members of the forum for any of a number of reasons such as rank, previous disagreements, sex, status, ect.
A troll usually flames threads without staying on topic, unlike a "Flamer" who flames a thread because he/she disagrees with the content of the thread.

1c. Noun
A member of an internet forum who continually harangues and harasses others. Someone with nothing worthwhile to add to a certain conversation, but rather continually threadjacks or changes the subject, as well as thinks every member of the forum is talking about them and only them. Trolls often go by multiple names to circumvent getting banned. .....

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troll

0 Replies

I will not argue my beliefs, however I will deconstruct:

Does the law, general consensus, or the reporters obligation increase the truth reliability of these normative assertions?

If a human attempted suicide from being 'trolled' by text, is it rational for this human to use the internet, to be subjected to physical trauma by the indirect harm of a subjective belief?

Also, did the reporter not state the following:
"An internet troll, that's what they look like"
Therefore, is the moral obligation to investigate a self refuting concept, being relative to the concept of racism?

1 Reply

@Anomie,

Anomie wrote:

Also, did the reporter not state the following:
"An internet troll, that's what they look like"
Therefore, is the moral obligation to investigate a self refuting concept, being relative to the concept of racism?

I didn't take that question quite so literally. I didn't see this as an indictment race or nationality. I saw this troll as a pathetic loser. A type, a caricature, the kind of guy we all know. The loudmouth jerk, the ignorant guy who sits all day on a bar stool making judgement on the world's problems. The kind of guy that will shout out a inappropriate joke, bully someone weaker because he's bigger than them or the creep who pinches the waitresses ass as she walks by. I saw a guy who's never done a worthwhile thing in his life, who has dug himself a hole he'll never get out of. Not because the man or the foreigner is keeping him down, but because he's an angry useless, jealous, waste of skin. A stereotype if you will, but not because he's white, because he's a first class asshole.

1 Reply

One man's troll is another man's sage.

Someone trying hard to reveal the true identity of an internet poster is, to me, a pompous and hostile bully.

There are millions upon millions of internet posters and only a very tiny sliver of them will be considered OK by both the Left and the Right.

The wonder of the internet is that it allows annonymous expression. Obviously we need to apply a reason filter when reading
these posts, but who is really hurt by the clearly idiotic comments of someone lost in the millions of web users?

Argue with positions with which you disagree. If you have the facts or eloquence behind you you probably will prevail, but it will be so in an ultimately obscure forum.

I always laugh whenever an A2K poster suggests that The Government is monitoring A2K.

The internet provides a means for serious minds to connect, but it is within the chaos born of impulsive and bent assholes.

If some jackass reveals my true identity I would probably have to leave A2K.

I own and run a business and can't afford political contraversy. I also don't think my particpation in this forum is anything more than an indulgence and hardly a staked out position of integrity.

Close down A2K to me and I think I will manage going forward.

In my experience, those most motivated to accuse others of being trolls are themselves likely candidates for trollhood.

1 Reply

@dlowan,

I think that the media will do anything for publicity.. They chose two submissions on facebook, from one person, tracked him down and put him in lights.

I think that is criminal, as there are more important things to show the world yes? To be wary of, newsworthy.

I think he is a jerk, but his comment of "is it illegal" means he thinks it's not and enjoys being a dickwad, using words that really aren't necessary, trolling.

Is it newsworthy? No.

Did it teach me anything? No

Could it have put him in danger? Yes.

That's the big one... Now we know his name, face, City... and he called someone a nigger.

Who therefore is trolling? If one definition is to rive people up? Where is the next murder going to take place?

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

I know you would take the side of the racist.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

. . . . David isn't necessarily a troll, but he trolls with his gun obsession very often.
If the topic is not guns, ranting about guns is inappropriate.

Yea, but kidding around about it
with a quick one-liner can be OK,
for a moment of levity, if its not too irrelevant
(i.e., if someone has kind of invited it).

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Izzy?? Hello ??

izzythepush wrote:
Council housing is social housing provided by the council.
A sink estate is a particularly run down example, riddled with all
sorts of problems. Nobody would actually choose to live in one.
They gave rise to the term postcode prejudice.
In contemplation of your post,
I looked at the video again, but I am at a loss to understand
what is distinct, in a negative sense, about the realty in question.
I was looking for run-down conditions surrounded by uncollected trash,
but I saw only 1 discolored corrugated metal security door,
in otherwise clean conditions.

( Do u know whether he lived there ?)

I remember taking cabs from the Railroad Station in Albany, NY
( the capital of NY ) to the NY Court of Appeals. I needed to close my eyes,
for the repugnant conditions of lack of maintenance:
a horrible assault upon the sensibilities! Gross n foul; it was UGLY.
Thay mostly consisted of failure to paint the real estate.
The paint was falling off, everywhere; extremely run-down conditions, in contrast
to what I saw in this video.

I don' t get the point. Maybe thay r bad on the inside; I dunno.

Did u see something in particular that led u to your negative
evaluation of the area? I 'm just curious regarding your evaluative processes.

David

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

I'm sure that the poor people in America live in worse conditions than the poor over here, in the same way the very rich have a lot more where you are than over here. It doesn't stop it being a sink council estate though.

1 Reply

@FOUND SOUL,

Yes.

0 Replies

Tracking and revealing the trolls....ok or not?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know