[OT] Trolling

[DDK]

Dude, don't put too much substance in what people say.

It came from someone whose opinion I respect.

If this isn't a Meta thread, I don't know what is. And awayyyy we go...

Oh, sorry, I've never been good at picking the right forum... to be honest, I didn't think about it all. I was kinda upset when I heard this so wasn't really thinking.

 

[Friadoc]

Fourecks,

...why don't you try making theoretical speculation instead of lies?

People would actually take the insightful forum of a theoretical statement, or situation, a lot better then they would an outright lie.

Plus, with a lie, you have to keep up with your position in it, the history of it, and other such items that, sooner or later, will catch you up and make you a liar in the eyes of those who catch you, as well as to those whom they tell.

With a theory, or any other kind of speculation, people look at you a lot better, consider their opinions longer, and focus more on the topic then they do the instances in the topic - IE: I'm sure what caught you up was all the publishers asking you for the site addy, et al, in reference to the piracy of their products.

A lie is a lie, it's all opinion as to the morality of it, as people's morals are defined by themselves, their background, and their place in the community and not just a definitive listing of right and wrong.

Personally I'll have no truck with a deceptive individual, however a rampant speculator and theoretician is a very enjoyable person, indeed.

 

[Sagan Darkside]

Why? Or did you mean you won't from now on?

Why don't I consider you a troll? I take you at your word that there was no malice and you had "good intentions", but I think that is just as bad if not worse then someone who does it out of malice.

I have been generally avoiding your discussions since the pirate thread. It is not out of malice, but any solid argument needs to be built on trust between the people in the argument. That is the only way to convince a person.

If there is no trust, then it becomes a matter of ranting. I have done too much ranting and trying to better.

A very rigid position to take, given the nature of humanity. Are you saying you never, ever, ever at all, do not, under no circumstance and will never lie? Even just a small smidgeon of exaggeration?

I have little reason to lie. My loyalty is to my own self-respect, and that does not warrant much need for deception.

The mere fact that I admitted it just goes to prove that overall I'm very honest, after all, I'm admitting it to my own detriment... but anyway...

Are you trying to convince me or you?

SD

 

[DDK]

Your post would have generated the identical commentary if you had mentioned that sites exist where such things are downloadable, and it still would have been shut down when it reached the point at which it was shut down (I apologize for my part in that BTW).

Yeah, that's the cutting edge of the knife now, isn't it? You see... I tend to... be a little... impulsive. In the above instance, there was no actual time at which the thought went through my head, "This is a lie, you could just say this another way," 'cause I was all enthused about the prospect of talking about the issue. Hell, there wasn't even a spur for the idea, I just had a brainwave that said, "Post a thread about piracy!" and did it...

Stupid maybe. Trolling probably. But I still found the thread interesting and I do, genuinely, believe piracy is a reprehensible act and I do, honestly wonder why more is not done about it. Speaking of which and as an aside: Judge to Verizon: ID pirates

Anyway, look, I'm sorry for that lie, I just didn't think and when I did, I didn't think it was a big deal. To my knowledge (which would be based on my memory... which is terrible) I haven't done that before or after. Eh, what can I say? Eric, can you change my nick to M.U.D.?

 

[EricNoah]

Eric, can you change my nick to M.U.D.?

I don't know, are you a community supporter?



(Sorry, man, I had to do it! )

 

[DDK]

I don't know, are you a community supporter?



(Sorry, man, I had to do it! )

Lol. After today I might have to be!

 

[Breakdaddy]

I want to be a community supporter. Please tell me how to do this without using a paypal account. I will do it postehaste!

/nudges Eric

 

[Umbran]

So in other words it doesn't really matter what is said, or even intended, as ultimately the judgement call is made by the mods.

I could be the envy of sweetness & light and yet still be labelled a troll.

Of course. Humans are fallible, silly person.

If you go into a resaurant, and your server screws up your order, dumps hot soup on your lap, is perfunctory, seems to pay no attention to you, and makes you wait interminably for your check, you will probably label her as a "bad waitress".

What you don't know is that she's normally a good waitress, but tonight she's got a migrane and can't see straight, and is only on the job because she desperately needs the money.

People apply labels based upon their observations and deductions. Sometimes, they get it wrong. It is terribly impolite to apply a negative label until you've got pretty overwhelming evidence, but it happens. Don't take it too personally. We are only human.

As a public service, I will now include the most full definition of "troll" as applied to the online communities that I've ever run across -

From The Jargon File:

troll

1. v.,n. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. See also YHBT. 2. n. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that they have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll." Compare kook. 3. n. [Berkeley] Computer lab monitor. A popular campus job for CS students. Duties include helping newbies and ensuring that lab policies are followed. Probably so-called because it involves lurking in dark cavelike corners.

Some people claim that the troll (sense 1) is properly a narrower category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing some assertion that is wrong but not overtly controversial. See also Troll-O-Meter.

The use of `troll' in either sense is a live metaphor that readily produces elaborations and combining forms. For example, one not infrequently sees the warning "Do not feed the troll" as part of a followup to troll postings.

 

[EricNoah]

Well now that we're on the topic of trolls, shall we try to identify some "definitely no-no trolling behaviors" as well as some that might be acceptable in certain circumstances?

Example of the classic troll:

A visitor who is not really a community member decides to register and then post an inflamitory comment designed to raise the hackles of the typical community member. So a post reading "D&D Third Edition is for 3etards!!!!" would clearly be a no-no type troll. The sentiment may be genuine (i.e. the poster genuinely hates 3E and probably thinks we're scum, but is not interested in a discussion but instead wants to see how many outraged replies can be garnered -- this is trolling in the sense of dangling bait...)

Example of the humorous troll:

A member posts a humorous question regarding a situation that only the most gullible would find plausible. Classic example is Bugaboo's post way back when asking how much DMs should charge to run games. 99% of the people get the joke and join in on the fun, 1% fall for it at first but get it eventually. This type of troll has often been tolerated here just due to the fact that when I ran these boards I personally found that stuff funny. Some people don't, and it happens a lot less frequently these days.

Example of genuine outrage that seems like a troll:

A long-standing member of the community (maybe not EN World, but the D&D community at large) posts an angry letter about how D&D Product XYZ will lead to the moral ruin of all D&D players. This has the marks of the classic troll, but ... this person has a great stake in staying credible in the community, and thus his motives are a lot less suspect. Still, the manner in which the missive is delivered does indeed raise a lot of ire and emotions run high. This kind of thread is probably tolerated for quite a while, mods make attempts to get people to stay on track and not make personal attacks, but ultimately it goes down in flames.

Anyone else care to add to the list?

 

[EricNoah]

I want to be a community supporter. Please tell me how to do this without using a paypal account. I will do it postehaste!

/nudges Eric

Hmm, I don't know. I think Russ is setting up an alternative payment method thingy but don't know where he's at on that.

Some folks I believe have sent money directly to Piratecat and he's passed it on to Russ via PayPal.

So ... long story short ... I don't know.