Your definition and mine don’t match, then. I would say if you sincerely believe what you’re saying, and have sincerely presented it, then you aren’t trolling.
Bwuh? I thought, if the poster believes in his or her ideas, then posting provocative things in the relevant area was hunky-dory? I thought trolls were typically disingenous by definition.
Not completely hunky-dory. There is a line and there has been the occastional Doper who crossed that line.
I don’t think it was trolling at all- the word choices and style to me were very similar to stuff I 've heard from Stephen Baldwin and Kirk Cameron- if he was trolling, he did his homework. And his public profile, which I assume he added when first signed on, states he is a member of the “J” team. I assume that stands for Jesus, but I could be wrong. Maybe the Utah Jazz?
And while I don’t agree with Omegaman on the issue, I was enjoying the spirited back and forth, and since it was in the pit, I didn’t see the harm.
I think there still has to be an intent to be disruptive and I didn’t see that intent in Omegaman’s posts.
For the most part, yeah. Or being unintentionally disruptive and continuing to be disruptive after being told to knock it off. One can also earn the “troll” label simply by virtue of having an inordinate number of Pit posts.
I haven’t read the thread in question so I’m not qualified to comment on Omegaman.
I was considering starting a thread to express the same sentiment, but since Dio beat me to it, I can do little but agree. I may have been a bit unfair in the amusement I found in the thread’s contents; nevertheless I believe closure to be unwarranted. Let O’man have his honest fret-n-fume session. Ain’t harming nobody none.
Pitting your cat is fine.
Pitting jaywalkers is fine.
Pitting dog walkers is fine.
Evil Captor starting a thread with a flat-out lie in the title is fine.
“Christ is a cunt” is hunky-dory.
A whole thread of people maligning a dead stranger in as nasty a way as they can manage is fine.
…but Pitting Satan is trolling.
Why is that, do you think? Because it is disruptive? Gosh, maybe we should all think twice before we disagree with the majority on anything - it might upset them. Because it is insincere? I guess he really does hate his cat. Because it is a subject that the mods don’t like? Whatever happened to “if you don’t like a thread, don’t read it”? Because Omegaman posts too much? Then I guess Guinastasia should worry about her status. Because it stirs up trouble? In a way that no other Pitting of no other Doper stirs up trouble, no doubt - what might that way be?
Bullshit.
Bullshit yourself. I really don’t care about the content of the OP or his point of view one way or the other. Read his comments for yourself. The guy is either a troll or a nutter; either way, thread closed.
I thought the same thing when the thread was locked. Our satan-hatin’ friend might be an illogical, ranting idiot, but he gave no indication that any of his stupidity or incoherence was insincere.
You’re a fucking moron.
Since he’s in agreement, does this make Shodan one of the Usual Suspects? Nice to have you on side, brother. 
Take the lately banned Trotsky as an example. The guy was probably a real conservative, who really did believe in the positions he advocated, but who made it a point to advocate them in the most insulting, insubstantial way possible. He may have believed in what he was saying, but the only reason he was posting here was to taunt the liberals, not to debate them. Which is trolling.
That said, I’ll add my voice in disagreement with fluiddruid. Omegaman seems a few sandwiches short of a picnic basket, but I don’t think he was trolling.
It seems that the majority of the people on this board think Omegaman wasn’t a troll, and that his thread didn’t deserve to be closed. So I’m not really sure where you and RyJae are going with this whole “herd mentality” argument. This seems a pretty poor example to hang that particular argument off.
Exactly.
As I said before, he’s a little rough around the edges. But I know plenty of people IRL who are just like him - they say what’s on their mind without a lot of polish and with a directness that sometimes comes across as deliberately provacative. That doesn’t make him (or them) trolls.
It was obvious to me in an earlier thread when I poked him about his “pal Jesus.” He didn’t get angry, he just laughed it off and busted my chops back.
He comes across as a little loony, and I truly think he’d be better off in GD where he could witness to his heart’s content. But the “trolling” charge is pretty far-fetched. And it really seemed that if that thread were given a little more time to develop, it would have become a more thoughtful exchange.
Good Christ – who cares?
Those who post to the thread, one would imagine.
Satan made fluiddruid close the thread. Duh.
This thread is making some strange bedfellows, but yeah, me too. Clearly he wasn’t trolling, which the mod acknowledges by not banning him. So the only remaining complaint is that he’s a “nutter” in the mod’s opinion. I’d wager that there are mods who think I’m a nutter too, but I can’t recall a thread of mine ever being closed on that account.
I was enjoying that thread. I was surprised it was closed. I’ve seen worse here that were not even close to being closed. (sorry for that)
I care about members being treated fairly and I care about a mod decision which contributes to any perception that the board has an administratively anti-Christian bias. I don’t think anyone should have a thread closed just because a mod (or even a majority of other posters) thinks he has a “nutty” belief. As long as the poster is coherent and is not TRYING to stir up shit, I don’t have a problem with nutty. We’ve had other respected posters (who will go unnamed) reveal some beliefs which the majority thought were at least as nutty as believing in Satan and those posters were not treated as trolls.
If it’s Charles Nelson Reilly, I’ve got some really bad news for you…