@blatham,
blatham wrote:
Quote:To be honest, sometimes it takes me awhile to catch on someone is a troll. For whatever that's worth. Once I do, I just distance myself, sit back and enjoy the show
That's just fine. We shouldn't be too quick to consider or label anyone a troll. But those who play this game tend to show their intentions quite quickly. I put them on ignore as soon as such patterns of behavior reveal themselves. I find zero value in reading these people and (how is this not clear?) only negative value in "arguing" with them.
Perhaps it is online culture or A2K culture. Or perhaps some romantic notion that rational argumentation will change these peoples' minds. The evidence contradicting that hopeful notion is so overwhelming that I truly cannot fathom why people try again and again and again, endlessly.
Very interesting statements above. I suspect there is some bias among all of us in labelling others as a "troll", involving greater selection among those persistent types, who also disagree with us. I agree that persistent, monotone folks who merely repeat themselves without factual or insightful input are not very interesting and, if they also frequently indulge in name calling, are offensive. In either case there's not much to be had in conversing with them.
There's another element that has not yet been addressed here. I think that most of us have likely learned a few lessons about some unique features of on line communications, particularly among folks who don't know each other well. There are no inflections, facial expressions, gestures or body language present in on line discussions - only the words we type. That can alter the communications we intend and add a new dimension of potential disagreement, conflict, or misunderstanding in any on line conversation.
Blatham's last paragraph above is fascinating -"... the perhaps romantic notion that rational argument will change these people's minds". It appears Blatham was referring to trolls here, but I have learned that this insightful observation applies very well to a much broader group of posters here, and people generally. I have frequently had the experience of investing in efforts to change the beliefs and behaviors of individuals and groups of people, and have come to learn how difficult it is, and how little is achieved by mere words and persuasion. Actions designed to cause those, whom one intends to influence, to experience and learn the intended lessons for themselves are usually the most effective means. I have also (after some substantial, and sometimes painful experience) come to value outcomes involving only a major part of what I intended. Human nature is complex and persistent : complete agreement is costly, rare, and usually ephemeral.
All that said, our behavior here, including my own, and that of Blatham, Setanta, Oliver, and others here does indeed involve persistent efforts to persuade and get agreement. All of us have exhibited intolerance of opposing views and focused our favor on those who agree with us, often to the disadvantage of those who don't. A sense of irony and appreciation for the complexities of our shared human natures is the only remedy I know of for this dilemma. Indeed it sustains me daily.
