Examples?

Thanks for any elucidation.

-- (retard@but.happy), May 03, 2000

Answers

How about Manny?

-- MannyFan (mannyfan@trolls.r.us), May 03, 2000.

Is asking a question like this a form of Trolling?

-- TrollSpotter (TS@nomore.trolls), May 03, 2000.

"Asking a question about trolling is trolling."

Please elaborate.

-- (retard@but.happy), May 03, 2000.

A troll is a mythical creature that lives under a bridge.

Trolling is when you slow the boat down to idle, and drag your baits slowly in the water.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), May 03, 2000.

In the real world, we call it "baiting." To provoke or harass, torment for sport. The apparent purpose of trolling is to generate a response, usually emotional.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), May 03, 2000.

What a stupid fucking question.

-- Manny (No@dip.com), May 03, 2000.

retard,

If we accept Ken's definition (which I think is a good one), then a very good example would seem to be the disruptive post to capnfun's prayer thread.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 03, 2000.

As I recall, anyone saying Y2K would not cause world-wide chaos was considered a troll.

Please explain what is wrong with posts that elicit "emotional responses."

-- (retard@but.happy), May 03, 2000.

Hi, Manny. Thanks for the informative response.

As Bertrand Russell said, "Swearing on the Internet is like pulling your pants down in public. You're just embarrassing yourself."

-- (retard@but.happy), May 03, 2000.

Retard ol buddy GO FUCK YOURSELF.

-- Manny (No@dip.com), May 03, 2000.

retard,

I think that a post painting pollies (or doomers, for that matter) with the sweeping generalization of calling them all trolls would itself be either trollish (see Ken's post) or would reflect the writer as being ignorant and too lazy to make disctinctions, or would simply reveal the writer as obtuse or dull-witted.

You asked,

[Please explain what is wrong with posts that elicit "emotional responses."]

Stating this precisely as you have (as contrasted with the three sentences in Ken's post) -- it depends on the context. For example, if you posted something humorous it would normally be fine to hope for appropriate emotional responses.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 03, 2000.

Thanks for the info, eve.

You said "Something humorous.. would normally be fine..."

What if the post was designed to get angry responses from those inclined to angry responses? What's wrong with that on a board like this?

I don't see why anyone would get angry on a fun board like this. This board is great for testing one's forensic skills, trying out some mild humor, and stuff like that. Most people here don't take this board seriously, thank Heaven.

-- (retard@but.happy), May 03, 2000.

retard,

You're welcome.

The problem with your response is that you've switched gears here by now referring to the "fun board" instead of addressing the devastating tragedy described in that particular thread. Even with regard to the rest of the "fun board" -- well, it's not all fun; there are plenty of other threads that are very serious. You really should look at the context of each thread and post and make the best judgment call you can with respect to how far you can go.

A good principle to keep in mind is that while you might just be looking at a "post," there's a human being behind it.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 03, 2000.

To add one pertinent thought to Ken's definition: the exact same post may be exhibited in two places and be considered a troll in only one of them. For instance, there are things you could say in a Ku Klux Klan rally that would ruffle no feathers, but would become a troll, if said in predominantly black church during the service.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), May 03, 2000.

You really should look at the context of each thread and post and make the best judgment call you can with respect to how far you can go.

Hey eve, you are talking to a guy who calls himself Retard.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), May 03, 2000.

Brian,

Nice point.

Uncle,

Thanks for the "heads up," but as a rule, I try to give them all the benefit of the doubt... :)

retard,

You see? Through the above exchange, Uncle Deedah got a grin out of me (for proof, note the face at the end of my reply to him). But (if I may speak for Uncle) that's an example of eliciting an "emotional response" where neither party intended anything malicious towards you. And I'm hopeful you took it that way; I mean, what did you expect by using a handle like that? Provoking or inviting comments like his can also be a legitimate part of the context, you know...:)

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), May 03, 2000.

Manny would like to be a troll, but since he's so pathetic he's not really a very effective one. He's really more like a cross between a rodeo clown and the village idiot. We do occasionally get a little bit of entertainment out of him, but he doesn't really seem to be capable of operating at a consciousness level sufficientto allow him to come up with anything that might truly provoke members of this forum.

-- Klicker (klicker@clicks.kbd), May 03, 2000.

Manny IS the troll living beneath the uncensored spinoff board.

You know, its there, so you just 'avoid' it. Its ugly, wants to run you off or eat you, whichever comes first.

And mouthy. But hey, its freespeech so, we just deal with the troll under the board.

Right mannny?

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 03, 2000.

Are Manny and retard siamese twins,battling for the keyboard,trying to get each other drunk so that one gets to make the next post? I don't know which one to cheer for!

One can only wonder!

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 04, 2000.

Darn it Capn,

You ruined it for me, I cant break my contract to keep my mouth off tard.

--silently pouting, see my pout face :----(((

My monies on manny.

If I'm wrong, I'll email you a card.........

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 04, 2000.

Consumer,

Ya know,if you read your last post just right ,it rhymes.Hey,might be a hidden talent ; )

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), May 04, 2000.

Who is a poet and didnt even know it???

What the heck am I doing up soooo late? Going to push felines off the bed....

-- consumer (shh@aol.com), May 04, 2000.

I asked the same question in a thread on the old TB2k last summer or fall, and in so many words got the same answer "retard" notes above -- "anyone saying Y2K would not cause world-wide chaos was considered a troll."

Though Ken D.'s "baiting" definition would seem to be more accurate. Sometimes I baited on that forum, sometimes not; but was most always considered a troll either way. (Especially by ol' buddy Andy.)

As always, it's in the eye of the beholder, huh.

-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), May 04, 2000.

A good match for Manny might be Madeline Nobright. She's Queen of Trolls, and the only one I can think of who is probably uglier than him. Of course he'd have to put up with all the cracked mirrors in their residence.

-- Matchmaker (match@nomore.trolls), May 04, 2000.

Chicken,

So you're saying that the trolls were the good guys on the old board, and the doomsters were the not-so-good guys. I think you are correct.

-- (retard@but.happy), May 04, 2000.