2012 Resolution: Ignore The Trolls

Byrnzie

pandora wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

pandora wrote:

baiting is...just another's opinion.

No it isn't.

Here's the definition of 'troll':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

looks like my definition is the same

No, your definition is not the same. You conveniently ignored this part of the definition: 'A troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages...'

Byrnzie

Anyway Pandora, you've successfully managed to derail yet another thread.

Well done.

Godfather.

he still stands wrote:

_ wrote:

I think it's clear that trolling is not defined by a difference of opinion, and I'd like to point out that one of the troll tactics is to try to legitimize bullshit by calling it a difference of opinion. (That usually comes after the tactic of repeatedly screaming the bullshit has failed to convince people that it's true.)

Also, in the case of hateful bigots, for example, I think one is often giving them the benefit of the doubt by calling them trolls. It's almost as if the person is saying, "I know you're not THAT evil or stupid to really believe all that stuff you're saying, so you must just be antagonizing."

yeah.

his post is a perfect example of what he or who he dis-likes, he seems to have come full circle with himself

Godfather.

pandora

justam wrote:

For all of you people defending trolls-->

You just missed all the action that led to this thread being made!

Occasionally there are people that arrive here just to say hateful things and to start hateful threads.
That's why someone wrote this thread.
It was in response to that!

By the morning, the trollish stuff is gone so you're arriving and wondering "What happened?" :geek:

Well, luckily, you didn't see it so you don't know what we're all referring to as "trolls." But, just so it's clear...
Trolls are posters that only come to cause trouble and say mean disruptive things. Often they start nasty threads about Ed's voice being gone or about the band's families or about any stupid thing. (!)

Sometimes angry people arrive just trying to cause trouble. Who knows why they need to come here? These are the trolls that need to be ignored.

My experience we have trolls that do not just arrive ...

they are psycho stalkers who repeatedly send pms though left unread
also those who though ignored and left on foe continue to deliver unsolicited insults.

In my opinion this is a personal troll not one who arrives in a thread
for whatever reason
and this is detrimental to the well being of those affected and for the forum
in general because of the negativity it creates.

pandora

Byrnzie wrote:

pandora wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

No it isn't.

Here's the definition of 'troll':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

looks like my definition is the same

No, your definition is not the same. You conveniently ignored this part of the definition: 'A troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages...'

I did not conveniently do anything you did not read my previous posts.
The topic we were just discussing pertained to the emotional response issue.
I covered thread integrity in numerous responses.

But one can not call it derail because someone does not agree with the popular click opinion
or when said poster has a related experience to share,
a positive angle to add.
As in this topic ... I obviously have trolls and am speaking on the subject of ignoring them.

Also I have noticed derailmant is a common problem in many discussions....
many many many

pandora

cincybearcat wrote:

pandora wrote:

usamamasan1 wrote:

Blast the fuckers and then again and again.Take their fucking oil too

that sounds like a core belief to me and no baiting personal attack or disrespect
because it is not directed at a person ... the poster is stating their opinion
on a world topic I am assuming, hard when taken out of context to know. I can tell though
it is not an opinion you share.

I don't think you will persuade a change in each other either

I guess it kinda depends on the context of the conversation, but it would be the rare case when something like that was just a core belief and not just said to troll. Unless they were just venting.

seems a whole lot of ventin goin on

but yes all these quotes and from one poster out of context was hard to say
seems like singling out to me

We have many creative people here, flavorful language and thought

cincybearcat

Byrnzie wrote:

pandora wrote:

baiting is...just another's opinion.

No it isn't.

Here's the definition of 'troll':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.


Pandora, do you think that your own personal opinion on the meaning of a word stands above the dictionary definition of that same word?

Did you read the next sentence in that wiki definition?

"While the word troll and its associated verb trolling are associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels subjective, with trolling describing intentionally provocative actions and harassment outside of an online context. For example, mass media has used troll to describe "a person who defaces Internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families."

It's evolving. Anyhow, I still think the message is a good one, though I will fail many times this year.

Godfather.

I am a troll :shock:
http://www.imdb.com/media/rm3490757376/tt0092115

Godfather.

Jeanwah

Byrnzie wrote:

Anyway Pandora, you've successfully managed to derail yet another thread.

Well done.

Which would constitute trolling. The more someone can derail a thread and carry others with them in derailing a thread the more power they have. Do we really want to feed the troll?

Shouldn't we all just ignore this troll? According to the title, yeah, we should. Simple solution here!

Jeanwah

redrock wrote:

pandora wrote:

you can ignore and put me on foe but you do not :?

one would think you like having a foe not on foe

hmmmm

I wonder why?

May I suggest you put him/them as foe(s). Thought this would have been done ages ago as he/they always seem to offend you. You wouldn't have to see (and respond to) their posts then. Wonder why not....

Maybe you won't even be seeing this message as I may be on your 'foe' list! Unless someone quotes it, obviously

What a novel idea. Pandora ignoring all of those who she's offended by. Shocking that this idea isn't more obvious. :shock:

MayDay Malone

Lot of hate for Pandora on here- what's the deal?

Sounds like Pandora is peacefully practicing what a lot of you are hatefully spitting about.

Everyone on this stupid forum is a professional TROLL in my opinion...

Whatever the fuck your definition is...

Godfather.

kindness is often mistaken weakness, Pandora has always promoted kindness and most of you look for reasons to attack her and that in it's self proves many things I have posted about peoples actions and words...
welcome to the "no better than us club" ya-all.

Godfather.

JonnyPistachio

cincybearcat wrote:

pandora wrote:

usamamasan1 wrote:

Blast the fuckers and then again and again.Take their fucking oil too

that sounds like a core belief to me and no baiting personal attack or disrespect
because it is not directed at a person ... the poster is stating their opinion
on a world topic I am assuming, hard when taken out of context to know. I can tell though
it is not an opinion you share.

I don't think you will persuade a change in each other either

I guess it kinda depends on the context of the conversation, but it would be the rare case when something like that was just a core belief and not just said to troll. Unless they were just venting.

This is the whole point I was trying to make all along.
I know and have seen the few people that enjoy trolling Byrzies posts. There are a few that are blatant attempts...

..posts that have been highlighted here that had obvious intentions to inflame and just stir the pot...its all in the context. Like "blast the fuckers again and again. Take their fucking oil too." What is that trash? It may be a core belief, but there has to be a line drawn. Yesterday Kat insisted someone edit their post that said they'd bomb the dept of education, which was obviously meant as "disassemble"... how is something as simple as that misunderstood?...but this other trash has to be called out. Suggestions of violence, aggression and hate is scary and unhealthy.

Godfather.

justify yourself anyway you feel the need,prove to your self you are right and so many others are wrong after all nobody here gives a shit what you think
there are lions in the den feeding on the kind at heart while the kingdom watches and drinks the blood that flows in forum pools and hungers for more, the need is growing,it's a verble blood bath of sorts.

Godfather.

gimmesometruth27

speaking of cliques....

pandora

JonnyPistachio wrote:

This is the whole point I was trying to make all along.
I know and have seen the few people that enjoy trolling Byrzies posts. There are a few that are blatant attempts...

..posts that have been highlighted here that had obvious intentions to inflame and just stir the pot...its all in the context. Like "blast the fuckers again and again. Take their fucking oil too." What is that trash? It may be a core belief, but there has to be a line drawn. Yesterday Kat insisted someone edit their post that said they'd bomb the dept of education, which was obviously meant as "disassemble"... how is something as simple as that misunderstood?...but this other trash has to be called out. Suggestions of violence, aggression and hate is scary and unhealthy.

Calling another's opinion trash is borderline hateful and degrading in itself ...
do you see this?

Many are in support of our country using force on many issues,
they have the right to speak it. And they do and they use their votes too.

Personally for me the scariest and most unhealthy thing is what you are suggesting,
that is, trying to censor those you do not agree with.

JonnyPistachio

pandora wrote:

I did click on the link I did see death penalty and I chuckled
sorry
what's and where's the beef?

Its that persons typical response that lacks anything informative, but is intent on instigating, or trolling. Again, context - is suggesting bombing a country for no reason and "taking their fucking oil" normal? Its not always meant that the person is attacking a person – Can you at least respect that there might be definitions other than yours?
I’ll agree that Cincy was right a few pages back, that maybe I was being too rigid on the fine line I believed there to be between trolling and bullying. I suppose I was just confused as to why this became about the people who are always attacking you. Sorry for that.

pandora wrote:

Like I said I wouldn't cry derail over that
In fact, just me, but I wouldn't cry derail ever...

I never said it was derailment. I said it was trolling.
But oh, I get it, its only when you deem something fit for derailment? Never? :?

pandora wrote:

Also I have noticed derailmant is a common problem in many discussions....
many many many

kinda confusing… :?

gimmesometruth27

JonnyPistachio wrote:

pandora wrote:

I did click on the link I did see death penalty and I chuckled
sorry
what's and where's the beef?

Its that persons typical response that lacks anything informative, but is intent on instigating, or trolling. Again, context - is suggesting bombing a country for no reason and "taking their fucking oil" normal? Its not always meant that the person is attacking a person – Can you at least respect that there might be definitions other than yours?
I’ll agree that Cincy was right a few pages back, that maybe I was being too rigid on the fine line I believed there to be between trolling and bullying. I suppose I was just confused as to why this became about the people who are always attacking you. Sorry for that.

pandora wrote:

Like I said I wouldn't cry derail over that
In fact, just me, but I wouldn't cry derail ever...

I never said it was derailment. I said it was trolling.
But oh, I get it, its only when you deem something fit for derailment? Never? :?

pandora wrote:

Also I have noticed derailmant is a common problem in many discussions....
many many many

kinda confusing… :?

see, this confusion and inconsistency on your position is exactly what happens when definitions are not rigidly applied.

pandora, you trying to repeatedly present and defend and expand upon your definition of trolling has created all of this. your definition is not how i apply it, and it is not how the majority of us apply it.

again, we should stick to the definitions of words that have been universally agreed upon.

JonnyPistachio

pandora wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

This is the whole point I was trying to make all along.
I know and have seen the few people that enjoy trolling Byrzies posts. There are a few that are blatant attempts...

..posts that have been highlighted here that had obvious intentions to inflame and just stir the pot...its all in the context. Like "blast the fuckers again and again. Take their fucking oil too." What is that trash? It may be a core belief, but there has to be a line drawn. Yesterday Kat insisted someone edit their post that said they'd bomb the dept of education, which was obviously meant as "disassemble"... how is something as simple as that misunderstood?...but this other trash has to be called out. Suggestions of violence, aggression and hate is scary and unhealthy.

Calling another's opinion trash is borderline hateful and degrading in itself ...
do you see this?

Many are in support of our country using force on many issues,
they have the right to speak it. And they do and they use their votes too.

Personally for me the scariest and most unhealthy thing is what you are suggesting,
that is, trying to censor those you do not agree with.

What?! :? Now you're calling me hateful and degrading becaus eI think someones opinion to bomb and kill innocents and steal their oil is trash?! ..and I NEVER said censor! re-read my post. I said called-out. Where do you come up with this stuff?

Calling it trash is not hateful...why do you assume so much? I guess we need another Pandora dictionary lesson. Trash, in this instance is foolish or pointless ideas, talk, or writing, nonsense. Look it up.
:?

pandora

JonnyPistachio wrote:

pandora wrote:

I did click on the link I did see death penalty and I chuckled
sorry
what's and where's the beef?

Its that persons typical response that lacks anything informative, but is intent on instigating, or trolling. Again, context - is suggesting bombing a country for no reason and "taking their fucking oil" normal? Its not always meant that the person is attacking a person – Can you at least respect that there might be definitions other than yours?
I’ll agree that Cincy was right a few pages back, that maybe I was being too rigid on the fine line I believed there to be between trolling and bullying. I suppose I was just confused as to why this became about the people who are always attacking you. Sorry for that.

pandora wrote:

Like I said I wouldn't cry derail over that
In fact, just me, but I wouldn't cry derail ever...

I never said it was derailment. I said it was trolling.
But oh, I get it, its only when you deem something fit for derailment? Never? :?

pandora wrote:

Also I have noticed derailmant is a common problem in many discussions....
many many many

kinda confusing… :?

I think I said I would not cry derailment seems silly to me.. and helpless or something
just put the train back on track instead of complaining about it
thing is it only happens when someone does not agree or doesn't like the poster
doing it otherwise it's called idle chatter and oops off topic silly us

Again that is that posters opinion as I see it
I am for free speech
we have been through this before Jonny remember the teachers rant thread?
We can agree to disagree with another's opinion but shouldn't stifle it
in my opinion.