I dislike the term 'troll' intensely. What is a 'troll'?

Originally, trolls lived under bridges. Like the dragons painted into old maps at the edge of the world, they threatened travelers. Seekers had to face dragons, trolls, and wrestle with their demons in their pursuit of knowledge.

Like Kirk (old Star Trek) who cheated on the Kobayashi Maru test to get through the academy...he never had to face death. I can sympathize with the admin being the bridge that everyone is trampling over. On the other hand, painting over dragons, and deleting trolls feels like I am cheating myself in some way.

If a person is 'disruptive'...he is a 'disruptor'...that breaks forum rules and they should be removed. Asking questions that no one wants to answer...just makes one boring.

I used to have much more fun with trolls before I became a Mod. I believe that troll came from the word "Trolling" as in fishing.

Which came from...? I just wish there was a less pejorative, and more descriptive word that was in common use.

Harlan,
Troll 101:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll

If you were at a bar, 'trolls' would be the guys you'd avoid....but in a bar, they are called a-holes.

No...those are the words you would use.

Thanks for the link...read the political view section.

right...I agree with the section you point out. as with any 'label', the term troll is mis-used, or rather, ill-used sometimes. on the other hand, every woman that has ever called a guy an ass (whether using those words or similar in spirit) is always 100% accuarate.

edit- to add to that, people are not perfect, even the people who are accusing people of being a [any term]. I've made mistakes based on incorrect hasty pre-judgements... I've also seen people/myself change after realizing their/my mistake. Those mistakes do not negate the fact that trollish behavior exists...

relating levels of troll: the levels are by difficulty in detecting them. 1=easiest to detect.

level 1:
Jerky boys:
have you ever received a crank phone call that at first sounds legit, but ends up being a juvinile prank? usually with a rasberry, air-horn or other nonsense.

level 2:
solicitation: junkmail. pushing an agenda.

level 3:
Instigators: "X style is better than Y style and I can prove it."

level 4:
nay-sayers:
Ever have a conversation with someone who constantly plays devils advocate and/or always doubting even the the most solid of facts?

level 5:
ego-trippers:
Since they already know everything, they only ask questions to confirm their belief that nobody else knows except them. or they only ask a question in order to dictate the 'correct' answer to others, in that regard the questions are facitious. The thread is usually guided into areas where no one can possibly have 'correct' answers... except for the ego-tripper of course. every once in a while they throw the dog a bone with "Exactly!", "Thats what I'm talking about!" or "I agree with you 100%!" ...plus that throws off their scent to troll-hunters.

The sad part is, someone can be a troll level 5 and not even know it....what do you do with these people? not sure. my suspicion is that they self-destruct by revealing their true nature after they get bored and end up getting banned.

I could be thinking about it wrong...in which case I refer to oldmans cartoon for the answers.

So, you advocate banning: jerky boys, solicitors, instigators, naysayers and ego-trippers? And how is any of this 'disruptive'...except to fragile egos?

I say that using the word 'troll' is too easy...it is a witchhunt...something used to isolate folks. If you don't like someone - too bad (not necessarily pointed at any individual...just asking folks to think about this).

Quote:

---

level 1:
Jerky boys:
have you ever received a crank phone call that at first sounds legit, but ends up being a juvinile prank? usually with a rasberry, air-horn or other nonsense.

level 2:
solicitation: junkmail. pushing an agenda.

level 3:
Instigators: "X style is better than Y style and I can prove it."

level 4:
nay-sayers:
Ever have a conversation with someone who constantly plays devils advocate and/or always doubting even the the most solid of facts?

level 5:
ego-trippers:
Since they already know everything, they only ask questions to confirm their belief that nobody else knows except them. or they only ask a question in order to dictate the 'correct' answer to others, in that regard the questions are facitious. The thread is usually guided into areas where no one can possibly have 'correct' answers... except for the ego-tripper of course. every once in a while they throw the dog a bone with "Exactly!", "Thats what I'm talking about!" or "I agree with you 100%!" ...plus that throws off their scent to troll-hunters.

The sad part is, someone can be a troll level 5 and not even know it....what do you do with these people? not sure. my suspicion is that they self-destruct by revealing their true nature after they get bored and end up getting banned.

I could be thinking about it wrong...in which case I refer to oldmans cartoon for the answers.

---

Quote by Harlan -

Quote:

---

So, you advocate banning: jerky boys, solicitors, instigators, naysayers and ego-trippers? And how is any of this 'disruptive'...except to fragile egos?

I say that using the word 'troll' is too easy...it is a witchhunt...something used to isolate folks. If you don't like someone - too bad (not necessarily pointed at any individual...just asking folks to think about this).

---

Interesting POV, Harlan. You might be Bullshido material after all. That is their line of reasoning for allowing "free speech" (to the point of trolling).

I actually agree with you that blanket deletion of someone's posts who are not always trolling is a bit too much for me, too. If they are violating forum rules, then the post should disappear. Otherwise, we should be mature enough to deal with it.

Kin's jerky boys will still have to walk the plank as long as I am around, though.

Thoughts? Comments?

"Thoughts? Comments?"

Sure...if ego-trippers were banned...this would be a mighty quiet forum.

I can deal with divas, and I enjoy watching discourse...but attacks should always be on the material/content...not personal. I dislike poor manners...as it reflects on the writer.

who said anything about banning ego-trippers for being ego-trippers? I'm saying I've seen the high-strung-never-wanna-be-wrong-never-laugh-at-themselves people have a meltdown and say things that lead to their own distruction...at which time they may or may not be banned according to the temperment of the mods, alignment of stars and tide levels. There are some that I've seen start off with troll-like behavior, and grow into the forum and actually contribute a different point of view...accepted view or not, it's still a unique view and might get someone to think differently.
I'm actually with you Harlan...give troll-like behavior a chance to mature...but then I agree with matt in, theres only so many times you can hear somone call someone else a 'poopy-pants'.