I agree with you: not a troll. Reflexively combative, and very, very stupid, but not a troll.
If someone accomplishes everything that a successful troll would (e.g., derailing conversation, refusal to address counterpoints repeatedly made, triggering angry reaction, etc.), that’s close enough for me.
Don’t understand the discussion and speculation re: a poster’s real motivation. Don’t care. If someone’s participation regularly starts a shit show, in that community’s culture that’s a troll for all practical purposes.
Hear, hear.
How about this, their chosen methods of argument and topics are often anger inducing, and I wish that the mods would have them dial back by about 60-70%, which, again I give @What_Exit great credit for calling out in the most recently closed thread with a warning.
I feel that -at this time- that the balance in terms of the posters participation, viewpoints, and (not that this says good things about -me-) a certain degree of amusing shit-stirring barely tips the value of the poster in the net positive direction. Maybe 55/45, although from day to day, it might be 60/40, or (in that particular thread) 20/80 on the bad side. I might have judged them even more harshly in that thread if I lacked my personal bias, but again, knowing I have it, I stayed the hell out.
Do I feel that they’ve become more confrontational and less believable over time? Yes. The whole discussion in ATMB a while back about words with loaded histories, especially things like “uppity” felt unbelievable to me, although other, well regarded posters indicated they too lacked that knowledge, so again, may be just IMHO.
Ask me about the poster again in a year. 
Aside to @Atamasama:
Please be aware that my comments regarding Sam_Stone in the Elon Musk pit thread are not meant in any way to defend Sam’s posting habits to date. I still feel convinced he’s a lying, trolling shit-stirrer. But if he wants to be better, I’m all for it. I took your comment as a backhanded compliment, but wanted to give S_S something more like positive reinforcement.
For those who aren’t in the thread, S_S admitted that removing the headline/title from Twitter/X threads was a stupid idea, and that Eloon should at least beta test some of these ‘upgrades’ out first before he digs himself a hole and fills it with shit based on his whims. Atamasama said “Stop saying things that make sense Sam” which, again, I took as a back-handed compliment, since up until that point, S_S had been defending Musk from a perspective that required 3 INCH thick Rose colored goggles to be believable.
Just peaking at his posts in the Jack Smith thread in P&E, I will say that is some textbook concern trolling from PG. “Oh, gosh, guys, I’m as dedicated an anti-Trumper as any of you, but I sure hope the charges against Trump don’t stick because, you know, what if the Republicans impeach Biden, then even after he is acquitted by the Senate, some state AGs could bring their own charges. That’d just be so terrible, you know, and, uh, we can’t let them do that to our guy, right? Since Republicans are so principled, it’s clear to me the only thing we can do to keep Biden from being unjustly punished is to let Trump off the hook for his rampant corruption and fraud (not to mention being the leader of America’s leading fascist movement). I know, I know, I don’t like it anymore than the rest of you, but we have to take these concerns seriously, you know?”
(No, not a word of that is an actual quote, but I think it’s a faithful paraphrase of his horrendously bad argument, which is almost as bad from a political standpoint as it is from a legal standpoint–though it is textbook concern trolling.)
Does’t this describe Sam Stone’s latest stunt in a thread regarding the Israel-Hama war? He, yet again, tossed out an assertion without backing, then when called on it, he posted a retraction. When queried why he posted it in the first place, he got snippy. And the snippiness got a response which garnered a mod note to the other poster. That’s pretty much the shampoo cycle*, isn’t it?
*Lather, rinse, repeat. Or, do 1st thing, do 2nd thing, repeat.
I’ve said pretty much the same thing to Sam multiple times on this board. 
Basically along the lines of, “Stop saying stuff I agree with or I might actually like you!”
Unfortunately he always does what I ask…
So…thus has become the omnibus “Bitch About Posters” thread, even when it’s not accusations of trolling, right? If it’s not a big enough gripe to devote an entire thread to them?
Because, I gotta tell ya, PhillyGuy was really getting on my nerves in the “DoJ/Jack Smith” thread in P&E.
For someone who claims to dislike Trump as much as he does, he sure goes out of his way to insist that Trump be treated differently than any other person on trial. Especially his “he was acquitted in his Impeachment, so he shouldn’t be charged with anything because of double jeopardy concerns,” or whatever the hell he was trying to say.
Thankfully, @Aspenglow booted him from the thread. At least, that’s how I interpreted her moderation.
I don’t think that’s really a fair representation. Unlike Sam’s cites in the past where he didn’t bother to read something or posted something from some right-wing loon, this was an initial report that turned out to be wrong. That happens all the time in situations like what’s going on in Israel right now. And Sam came back and corrected it.
Sam often deserves criticism for his cites, but let’s save it for when he really deserves it.
And DrDeth deserved all of Sam’s snippiness. Sam had already corrected himself when DD came in to repeat what Sam already said.
Use a backslash before the colon to break a link:
https\://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-difference-between-outlines-after-the-sketch-preparatory-drawing-and-line-art-without-a-sketch/991209/19
becomes
https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-difference-between-outlines-after-the-sketch-preparatory-drawing-and-line-art-without-a-sketch/991209/19
~Max
I get this, really. I myself have a pretty high threshold for when a troll ought to be booted (unfortunately the mods unwisely fail to confer with me), and a bit of pot stirring can make things more interesting.
But a mildly amusing troll is still a troll, and I don’t care if his heart is true and his motives virtuous. He’s still stirring the pot and raising the temperature, and not by the strength of his arguments.
To be clear, he’s not banned from the thread. We’re required to formally document a thread ban. But he is stopped from continuing the farcical argument he kept making as you outlined in your post about how being “acquitted” in an impeachment is somehow the same as being “acquitted” in a criminal trial. (And since we’re in the Pit, I’ll just add: JFC.)
@What_Exit JFC is a TLA (three letter acronym) that means Jesus Fucking Christ.
Heh, just kidding around, dude. 
I thought it was jalapeno fried chicken which sounds damn delicious.
Though honestly I had no clue. So that ended up being helpful.
*abbreviation. I was being a smartass, ended up looking like a dumbass.
No, although the strict definition of an abbreviation comprised of the first letters of the words in a term is “initialism”, the term “acronym” is often used loosely to mean the same thing, and such usage is recorded in dictionaries. So you were not a dumbass. You were a successful smartass! 
Strictly speaking, an acronym should be a distinct word on its own like laser or scuba. Even neologisms like “FOMO” can be called acronyms, as you’re pronouncing it as a word and not just speaking the individual letters from the initials.
But yes, the term is loosely used for initialisms in general, and language is forever evolving, so it’s not really wrong to use it in that case.
He was initially a smartass. But subsequently a dumbass for not realizing that he had been a successful smartass.