I’m posting this here because such topics can get ugly and I’d prefer people expressed themselves freely.
In the Republitroll thread several posters accused me of trolling and this puzzled me. I stand on my posting record of 15 years in this place. The only warning I’ve had is one from the early 2000s where I inadvertently raised a topic which a mod had expressly forbidden from being discussed in that thread. I apologized and moved on.
Now if I had been trolling and was unaware of it (if one can even troll without conscious intent) I’d have thought one of the mods would have certainly brought it to my attention, certainly if, as one poster warned me in that thread, I was on the ‘bubble’. None have. *
That leaves us with the posters who have accused me of being a troll and my interest is in asking why they should think that. Do they believe that posting unpopular opinions qualifies one as such? The forcefulness with which those opinions are expressed? Sheer dislike felt by the poster for me? I can certainly understand the emotions involved but are those emotions grounds for labeling someone as a troll?
I’m genuinely nonplussed by the accusations. I love the SMDB but obviously I’d have little interest in remaining here if I was seen as trolling. Who would? (Except a real troll, I guess.) My comfort is that those of us who post in the Pit are far from from representative of the board as a whole and it’s only a small minority of those who have called me so.
So in summing up I’d just like to know what you think a troll is. I shall then know whether I fit the description, although I suspect the definition may not be precisely the one used in the rules. Have at it then. I can take it, my curiosity far exceeding any potential discomfort I might feel at the replies.
Please, mods, do let me know if I have overstepped a mark. I have no wish to flout the board’s rules.
I look forward to a thoughtful, erudite exchange of views with you on this topic. Perhaps we could meet later in the grand library for Armagnac and petit fours, if you succeed in extricating your head from your rectum and I complete the act of fornication with my own mother.
Perhaps were need an omnibus “Troll, or Just Plain Stoopid?” thread. I think it’s common here to be overly broad with the “Troll” label. I’m sure I’m guilty of that offense from time to time.
Trolling is posting something inflammatory with the intent of stirring up trouble. For a non-trivial number of posters, posting anything with which they disagree is inflammatory if it has to do with certain selected topics (meaning race, gender, politics, or Trump). So someone posts something along those lines, the posters in question give their canned responses, and thus make it clear that they were inflamed. Once the responses are made, the poster is considered refuted. If he or she persists, then it is obvious that the intent is to inflame, and thus it becomes trolling. Then the pile on begins, consisting of a mixture of repetition of the first refutation, nitpicking, veiled or not-so-veiled insults, and so forth.
Then the Doper who posted the original opinion has a choice. He or she can not respond. That’s good enough for the Usual Suspects - they have silenced an opinion they don’t want to see. Or he or she can ignore the attacks and respond substantively. That’s not always easy, and the net result tends to be that the rational Dopers can be debated, and the Usual Suspects simply return to their background level of sniping, snark, and accusations of trolling in the Pit. That appears to be what is happening to you (aldiboronti. You post something they don’t like, you didn’t fall for the distractions, thus the Usual Suspects simply go back to ‘he’s a troll he’s a troll he’s a troll’.
Or the Doper who posted the opinion can respond only or primarily to the attacks, in which case then he or she gets piled on even more and reported and it is taken for granted that this proves he or she is a troll.
:shrugs: It’s the Dope. It isn’t going to change.
Regards,
Shodan
PS - I am being as careful as I can not to mention anything about the moderation, which would be a topic for ATMB. My post is meant to apply only to posters, or mods posting as posters.
Others are guilty of the opposite. On the one hand, you have your Bart Simpson, slingshot-and-stink-bombs troll. On the other, your deeply concerned, chin-stroking, Socrates-wannabe, please-just-help-me-understand troll.
Can you guess which one I personally find more irritating?
Because you need to be aware of what it is the context. A context that does show how silly is to claim what you did, going to a bigger context IMHO what it is going on is that many conservatives are having a lot of trouble realizing that posters like Clothy were trolling many times.
Of course as it was pointed in the other thread, if not trolling, the other option is even more reprehensible and harder to understand by many conservatives that try to ignore that minorities have to endure or that liberals and even moderates do have a point when defending their ideas.
Emphasis added. Both of those are trolls, regardless of which you find more irritating. There’s a reason we have the subcategory “concern troll”. At any rate, surely you’ve seen the many times in his forum where someone calls out “Troll” and others say “Nah, he’s just stupid”. Sometimes there’s a blurry line since we can’t see into the other person’s mind, and there certainly are stupid folks out there who do an excellent job of imitating trolls-- it’s not always obvious which is which.
Yes, and that is still only one person. Sure he may be a troll, but many people aren’t. Look at the “Trolls R Us” thread. Many of those are just posters giving a stupid opinion, or one that is not popular. Doesn’t make them trolls.
And I said “some people” If you aren’t one of those people, then good for you! Go get a cookie.
Posting unpopular opinions in the SDMB is both an art and a science and involves diplomacy.
First thing you’re probably thinking: Why should I temper my thoughts? I have a right to express myself freely. I’m not going to soften my stance just because a bunch of whiny liberals call me names.
This is where the science part comes in. Think of this as an experiment. What happens if I present my opinions, no holds barred, take no prisoners, and tell it like it is? Observation: angry feedback, name calling, accusations of trolling.
Now, what happens if I tone it down? Instead of making accusations about liberals, ask “Have you considered this?” Instead of saying “This liberal policy will destroy America,” you say “Have you considered how this liberal policy creates more of a burden on taxpayers? Have you considered that upper income earners usually resort to shipping their facilities overseas to avoid paying higher taxes?” That’s where the art comes in - shaping your words to invite to take part in the reasoning process, not to attack. LBJ’s motto was “Come, let us reason together” in dealing with abrasive political opponents. Result: still get some negativity from the extreme left, but overall, reduced hostility.
One final question: do you like the hostility and drama? Are you thrilled that you stirred the hornet’s nest and got several pages of responses? If so, you might be a troll.
Do you feel disturbed and unfairly treated? If so, you didn’t realize this message board would be so unlike the company you’re used to keeping. You probably assume that the participants are hostile and unreasoning. That’s politics. Now you know what it’s like when Israel and Palestine negotiate. Now you know what it’s like when China and other countries that border the South China Sea negotiate. You’re faced with the dilemma of keeping your strong stance and facing more hostility, or weakening your resolve and giving in to the dominant paradigm. What’s at stake here? Your pride? What’s pride worth on a message board? Does anybody say “He might be a jerk, but he sure has pride!”?
And clearly you did miss that I concentrate on the ones pointed out by the OP in that thread. The OP there was right on the money.
The reason why that thread was pointed is that the OP here had a semi epiphany there, that leads to this thread.
The point I want to make is that when you are not capable of noticing when conservatives are trolling you can get tarred by not realizing that the ones you are defending are; well, trolls or jerks.
I believe I tend not to throw around accusations of trollery, and I don’t think the OP is one, but really. anyone with the slightest sense of self-awareness can probably figure out for themselves whether something they have posted might draw a legitimate warning for trolling. Simply ask yourself, a) is this opinion I am about to express something that I know most people are likely to strongly disagree with; b) Is the only way I can phrase this the most antagonistic way possible? c) Am I posting it to advance the conversation or just to show all those assholes what assholes they are?
ETA: or, what Knowed Out said.
In the end, however, I’ll argue it doesn’t much matter if someone who is not a Mod accuses one of trollery. For one thing, the only place they can do that is the Pit, and if one is in the Pit already, a certain degree of antagonism can be assumed, yes?
I don’t believe you are a troll. I must say though that the sheer number of threads you have started since the election, with almost all being highly critical of just very slightly different aspects of liberals, etc, does show, in my opinion, some degree of obsessiveness.
Fair enough, I agree with this point. But my point stands as well - a lot of accusations of “Troll!” on this board stem from a simple disagreement with an opinion, and are not derived from actions that are intentionally made to inflame other posters.
If aldiboronti is being accused of trolling, the context also shows some of the times where what manson1972 talked about was happening, where people are not trolling but get accused of it anyway, simply because they posted an opinion at odds with the rest of the board.
No offense, but compared to the number of threads bashing Trump since the election, I wouldn’t pick out aldiboronti as a good example of obsessiveness.
I don’t think it’s a “simple” disagreement. More like a vehement disagreement.
The general notion is that the offending opinion is so offensive and so incredibly stupid that the likeliest explanation for someone putting it forth is that he’s trying to be deliberately offensive. Nobody could really believe that kind of thing.
Of course, it all starts with the premise that you yourself are really and obviously correct in your own opinion. But there’s no shortage of that here. And many of the people fond of calling other people trolls are themselves borderline morons, who can get a grasp of their own opinions only because they’ve repeatedly read them in other sources, but are hopeless at rationally considering alternatives.
This is a bit incomplete, the trolling is noted when the one being asked that is actually disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often for the troll’s amusement. There is no sincere intention to convince others, and insults are part of the effort.