Well, you’ve made him very tired.
There’s nothing like an intentional spelling mistake to lull a pedant out from under the rocks. Congratulations.
I do like that, much like pseudo, you’re demonstrating a frightful lack of grey matter while spewing stupid insults.
Here, let me clue you in to something, again. Call it a free hint. Follow along, I’ll go slow and break it up into bite-sized pieces:
Who are the people who’re posting in this thread? Dopers.
Who did you insult? Some of those posters, who are all Dopers.
Did you, thus, insult Dopers? Yes.
Does that include the word “all”? No, you’re a moron.
Glad I could clear that up for you.
That’d be a cut and paste typo for “insulting exaggeration”.
You sure showed me.
So, unh… you deliberately made a spelling error so that you could have someone correct you at it, and then insult them?
You know that’s an admission of trolling, right?
Of course, you’re just a punk who can’t admit you made a mistake, right? And you are so puerile that you’re using trolling as a defense against admitting a simple typo?
If that’s your definition of trolling, you’re an even bigger fool than I thought. I’ll call it a day before you dumb me down to your level. 'Bye.
And much like pseudo, you sail right by everything which shows that you’re blustering and sputtering in a fit of militant ignorance, offering nary a retraction nor an apology, but responding with another bit of ignorance to a cherrypicked phrase out of the whole argument against you.
And yeah, posting something with the deliberate intention of getting a rise out of someone and then insulting them is kinda the textbook definition of trolling. And you admitted to it. Idiot.
It’s interesting that you seem to have the same basic trouble with the English language as pseudoprof.
What?! That trophy is mine, you commie FUCK!
Faugh! Well played, sir. I find myself once again ensnared in your concertina-wire wit.
Huh. So Bryan Ekers is apparently a troll by FinnAgain’s definition. So Bryan Ekers can’t be troll-hunting unless he’s hunting himself which would be way too confusing.
So who are the trolls and who are the troll-hunters trying to save us from the trolls and who are the ordinary a**holes? I can’t keep track anymore.
And who are the twits? From the list, it looks like people who post unpopular beliefs and at one time or another lost favor with some people here. So it’s kinda like people who are easy targets because they don’t have lots of people to back them up?
Don’t even get me started on who it is that’s posting hyperbole. Who can even tell?
Mmmmmmm … battered children. Sounds yummy but doesn’t make it right. 
No.
There’s a distinct difference between posting to insult someone, finding enjoyment in mocking idiots, and posting deliberately to get a rise out of someone in order to insult them/get them annoyed/frustrate them/etc…
In this forum folks are allowed to post deliberately to insult someone. Folks are allowed to post specifically because they enjoy insulting people, too.
Oh, I wouldn’t think so. I like to needle specific individuals (incidentally, I forgot to include lissener in the above list) while I thought trolling involved making inflammatory statements to a general audience in hopes of getting several or many angry responses.
As I recall, the mods at times have warned some posters of “stalking” (or similar behaviour) but to qualify for that, I’d have to be shown to be following an individual from thread to thread for no other reason than to continue to abuse them. prr and ivan don’t require that degree of focus. If they’re in a thread, odds are they’ll say something stupid sooner or later. If I happen to visit that same thread, I might or might not see an opportunity to make a joke at their expense. Both, I’ve noted, have accused me (or others) of obsession just for responding to them three or more times in a row:
i or p: [something bold and stupid]
observer: [joke]
i or p: [lame semi-literate insult of o]
o: [counter-insult]
i or p: “Your opposition proves I’m right!”
o: “No, it proves you’re an idiot.”
i or p: “Why are you so obsessed with me? Were you bottle-fed?”
Rinse, repeat.
I wish I had…but the memories will last forever!
Wow, you’re slicing that distinction rather finely. I can’t actually see the differences between categories except for the word ‘idiots’. Since different people categorize ‘idiots’ differently, that’s not even much of a distinguishing factor.
Care to elaborate?
Hmm. I wasn’t creating the definition of a troll. I was just noting that you fit under FinnAgain’s definition. Under his definition, there only has to be someone that one tries to get a rise out of.
Something I noticed about your list of specific individuals that you like to needle. It’s generally a list of people who have been Pitted at least once and for most, several times. What they all have in common is that they lack the backing of the majority of people here, or at least there’s the perception of that.
For bonus points, I’m bringing that back to the topic at hand. . . spanking. What bugs me is when people use power or perceived power to dominate anyone, even if just in a small way.
That’s why I don’t mind if people wanted to swat their kids in front of other people who have more power than they do. Or if people want to needle people who are quite popular here. It’s just when there’s a possibility (even minutely) that there can be abuse of power that it bugs me.
True enough, I guess. I can only say that Finn’s definition of troll doesn’t match my own or, as far as I can tell, the definition in use by the moderators of this board. The “someone” I’m after in a joke/insult post is a specific someone. The “someone” a troll is after in an inflammatory post is a generic someone.
Anyone who disagrees is free to use the report button, of course. If enough of them do, perhaps they can effect a change in board policies and I would be told to change or leave.
You’d have a more compelling point if my list (and to be clear, it is a list of people I have needled, not people I seek to needle) consisted of people who never got pitted and who were consistently popular with “the backing of the majority of people here”, whatever that means. That would suggest I was envious of the popular kids. Instead I find these people can be jerks and numerous others have also found they can be jerks, so if anything, I’m vindicated.
Yay.
What “power” is allegedly being abused, here? Or is that a generic phrase that includes mods and admins?
Sometimes you just lose your tempura, you know?
Enjoy,
Steven
There’s a vast difference and the distinction is actually quite a bit less complicated than you’re making it.
Pointing out something that you view to be wrong/stupid/annoying, in a forum designed for insulting other people, is not against the rules. The motivation is internal and some folks simply get a kick from rhetorical bar brawls and/or fighting ignorance.
Trolls don’t wait to find something that they view to be wrong/stupid/annoying, they create bait to cause conflict, annoy people and and start fights while acting/feigning/pretending to be innocently put upon. The motivation is to get a rise out of people and piss them off.
It’s only “not right” if you don’t use panko or leave them too long in the fryer.
Over-fried would be bad, on the other hand, shaken is better than stirred.
Enjoy,
Steven
You guys never heard of Shake N Bake? It comes out right every time.
So, are we still beating up on people who beat up on their kids, or have we beaten that topic to death?