The first one.
Jeez, way to give Monty the answer. :mad:
Yes, but we strike straight, and that matters.
Oops. :o
Is Miss Spaulding a troll or just stupid? This post sure seems like trolling and the poster has just signed up.
I suppose I can be grateful for that.
Not so fast. There’s some cat porn over in GQ right now.
Help determine the sex of my kittens (with pictures)
I hear she also let Lefty get away, which was also out of kindness (I suppose).
Recent research (link to coverage here: Algorithm 'identifies future trolls from just five posts' | Internet | The Guardian) suggests that message board trolls (apparently defined as “people who will go on to be banned because of their behavior”) can be identified with a high degree of accuracy within 5 posts using an algorithm that analyzes their writing.
The characteristics that make trolls stand out include fewer words indicative of positive emotion, lower scores on a standard readability index, and this (bolding mine):
[QUOTE=article about identifying trolls]
They discovered that users who would end up being banned from the site often wrote noticeably different to the main bulk of commenters. “Users can stay on-topic or veer off-topic; prior work has also shown that users tend to adopt linguistic conventions or jargon in a community … and that they also unconsciously mimic the choices of function-word classes they are communicating with.” Sure enough, they found that “text similarity” of banned users was significantly lower than that of non-banned users.
[/QUOTE]
Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?
I wonder how much of that low “text simularity” is due to the trolls being banned before they adapt to local customs and how much is due to deliberate disregard of the standards.
Zero and one hundred percent, respectively.
We also need to see some "hahaha"s. No confused altie post is complete without a complement of "hahaha"s (or "HAHAHA"s).
This post has been pink comic sans’d by the… oh you get the point.
If the research is valid at all, they used the first five posts of all users for comparison, and the first five of trolls were different from the first five of non-trolls.
You mean they needed a con-troll group?
Yip, because they are analyzing the first five posts of everyone, including those who aren’t trolls.
That said, that high accuracy is 80%, and only rises to 82% if you use 10 posts. It’s maybe good enough to implement some sort of automated pre-moderation for their posts, but not good enough to actually weed them out.
Coulda had him any day.
I either love you or want to fling dirty laundry at you, I can’t seem to decide which.
Ah crap. I was actually going to defend the green font thing as much ado about nothing, as she seems to be literate and able to converse intelligently, which is always a welcome change from the usual drive-by types we get here. I was also going to suggest that you all not gang up on her. But anti-vax nuttery is some of the worst stupid out there today, so she’s on her own. I have no patience with willful ignorance.
I find the latter is very often my partner’s expression of the former.