CDZ The Psychology of Trolling

[Mac1958]

I had about 6 or 7 on ignore and took them off. First, I saw that they kept posting to me and about me, even they knew I had them on ignore - you could see the posts when you quoted someone who quoted them. I have to admit that was a bit of a surprise -- I assumed that they wouldn't stoop to attacking people who couldn't see their posts.

I had no doubt that the "trolls" would keep attacking. I'm not that concerned about what folks say on here anyway, but I'm not at all concerned about personal aspersions the "trolls" cast my way. At the end of the day, those sorts of remarks show the poster's weaknesses, ignorance, lack of substance, stupidity, etc. for what it is and everyone who is better than that can see it. Once I've seen it and decided to ignore the member, I don't need to keep seeing it; in ignoring them, I've decided they too often have nothing of merit to say.

I realized that their posts were very helpful to use as examples of my points. I was missing out on opportunities!

Well, there is that. LOL

Even so, those opportunities are, IMO, "low hanging fruit." As with actual fruit, some of it hangs so low it touches the ground and becomes rotten, thus it goes unharvested. Such is how I see the opportunity offered by the "trolls'" remarks on USMB. Clearly you see it differently, and that's fine. You have the interest, perhaps time to "mess with" those posters/posts. I don't. Perhaps were I to write shorter posts I would, but I still won't use the extra time doing so.

I no longer try to carry on a conversation with them. Any posts that refer to them are more likely to essentially say, "holy CRAP, just LOOK at THAT".

They and their behaviors remain a fascinating amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study for me, though.
.

 

[320 Years of History]

They and their behaviors remain a fascinating amateur psychological / sociological / anthropological study for me, though.

I can understand how that happens. I too have many and varied interests, some of which appeal to certain other folks and at the same time don't appeal to yet other folks.

 

[I amso IR]

Hello all. Trolling is something I have been accused of and that bothers me. I tend not to insult, be loud and offending and make every attempt to not be that way. I also tend to monitor conversations with the idea in mind, such as this particular conversation, to learn and understand. If I choose to enter then it is generally with a comment in which I may agree or disagree with the OP on that subject. For me, defining trolling is difficult. I find some folks boorish but does that make them a troll? I feel perhaps not. Maybe they are simply boorish. Perhaps they are insultingly crude. OK, but perhaps they are genuine in their speech. I do not care for vulgarity in any sense, however there are folks whose every other word is "fuck". It bothers me and when it does I go elsewhere. I choose to join a conversation based on how i feel about that conversation and place much of my attention on how others conduct themselves. However, should I decide to join that conversation, then the onus is upon myself to follow the lines of reason presented. Trolls, in my experience, lack or do not accept that form of rational. I find this entire conversation important and reveling in that most who have responded, in my view are, some of the more responsible USMB members, a group I have not become a part of. In closing, the problem with every definition of a troll is that they are very general and open. Does anyone have a defination of trolling which is outside of the canned study troll? What in hell constitutes a "TROLL"?

 

[Mac1958]

Hello all. Trolling is something I have been accused of and that bothers me. I tend not to insult, be loud and offending and make every attempt to not be that way. I also tend to monitor conversations with the idea in mind, such as this particular conversation, to learn and understand. If I choose to enter then it is generally with a comment in which I may agree or disagree with the OP on that subject. For me, defining trolling is difficult. I find some folks boorish but does that make them a troll? I feel perhaps not. Maybe they are simply boorish. Perhaps they are insultingly crude. OK, but perhaps they are genuine in their speech. I do not care for vulgarity in any sense, however there are folks whose every other word is "fuck". It bothers me and when it does I go elsewhere. I choose to join a conversation based on how i feel about that conversation and place much of my attention on how others conduct themselves. However, should I decide to join that conversation, then the onus is upon myself to follow the lines of reason presented. Trolls, in my experience, lack or do not accept that form of rational. I find this entire conversation important and reveling in that most who have responded, in my view are, some of the more responsible USMB members, a group I have not become a part of. In closing, the problem with every definition of a troll is that they are very general and open. Does anyone have a defination of trolling which is outside of the canned study troll? What in hell constitutes a "TROLL"?

As with most words like that, there's going to be a zillion different definitions. That's why I tried to be somewhat specific: "I want to concentrate on the behavior of reacting to a post or article or column by getting nasty and personal, and staying nasty and personal."

There is much of that here. You make a comment that is not directed at anyone specifically, and in they come with personal insults and name-calling.
.

 

[I amso IR]

Hello all. Trolling is something I have been accused of and that bothers me. I tend not to insult, be loud and offending and make every attempt to not be that way. I also tend to monitor conversations with the idea in mind, such as this particular conversation, to learn and understand. If I choose to enter then it is generally with a comment in which I may agree or disagree with the OP on that subject. For me, defining trolling is difficult. I find some folks boorish but does that make them a troll? I feel perhaps not. Maybe they are simply boorish. Perhaps they are insultingly crude. OK, but perhaps they are genuine in their speech. I do not care for vulgarity in any sense, however there are folks whose every other word is "fuck". It bothers me and when it does I go elsewhere. I choose to join a conversation based on how i feel about that conversation and place much of my attention on how others conduct themselves. However, should I decide to join that conversation, then the onus is upon myself to follow the lines of reason presented. Trolls, in my experience, lack or do not accept that form of rational. I find this entire conversation important and reveling in that most who have responded, in my view are, some of the more responsible USMB members, a group I have not become a part of. In closing, the problem with every definition of a troll is that they are very general and open. Does anyone have a defination of trolling which is outside of the canned study troll? What in hell constitutes a "TROLL"?

As with most words like that, there's going to be a zillion different definitions. That's why I tried to be somewhat specific: "I want to concentrate on the behavior of reacting to a post or article or column by getting nasty and personal, and staying nasty and personal."

There is much of that here. You make a comment that is not directed at anyone specifically, and in they come with personal insults and name-calling.
.

Hello Mac, thanks for answering. I agree with you in that regard. It bothers me that there seem to be those who "go personal" and make intelligent conversation difficult. Why people choose a public forum to vent personal attacks is puzzleing on the one hand and self evident on the other. It seems the "mods" have made an honest attempt to control that behavior but only partially successful. Perhaps the ever present "BAN" should be more used. Then of course the "Free Speech" issue would be brought into play and down hill from there. I am certain of one thing with regards to the subject. Far to many folks, older folks, of which I am one, have far to much time on their hands and entering a board such as this is far to simple. Were I to be asked to assign a reason for this behavior, it is in all likelihood, boredom, frustration, inattention and simply regression to early years with no one providing a solution. It is termed the "golden years" which is misleading to those entering that period. And the resulting end cannot be altered, period. I found this posting interesting and thought I might enjoy it some what. The USMB is so predictable and in the end tiring. Thanks again for your response, My advice, ignore the children and let them stew. Builds character after all.

 

[Correll]

But I consider A LOT of the common talking heads that repeatedly appear on cable TV or radio to spin and attack ----- as trolls too.. They are not there to discuss the topic. They have their own agendas.

Yes, I can see that. They're not answering the interviewers' questions, they're just spouting off talking points and attacking the other "side". They're contributing nothing, they're not advancing the topic at hand in any meaningful way.
.

Often I see trolls not just contributing nothing, but actively trying to prevent others from being able to have a discussion.

IMO, it is often used by partisans as a tool to prevent information or points from being made that they want suppressed.

 

[Correll]

Thank you, I'll go through those.

And yes, the incidence of trolldom (?) online is fantastically higher than in real life - so that might indicate that the behavior is some kind of cathartic mechanism, that otherwise normal people turn into something else when online, and for a reason.

I also remember something called "Histrionic Personality Disorder", in which the person craves drama and negative attention: Histrionic Personality Disorder Symptoms | Psych Central
.

I don't know. Maybe person to person trolls are rare. But I consider A LOT of the common talking heads that repeatedly appear on cable TV or radio to spin and attack ----- as trolls too.. They are not there to discuss the topic. They have their own agendas. If trolls are good at one thing, it's keeping people from carrying on adult conversations --- and possibly --- learn something...

Yep. Look how they are allowed to control the conversations on this board.

That's pretty much how trolls troll, I reckon...
.

It's hard to be annoying in a single post. VOLUME has a lot to do with being a pro troll. And just look at all the media role models they have to choose from. It's like a free BA degree in trolling just listening to the paid professionals. !!!!!!

Especially when you know they aren't interested In a legitimate conversation. Just making noise and post count.

Allowing their posts to go unchallenged allows them to create the illusion of consensus thought the Proof by Assertion as propaganda.

Bold size increase added.

Proof by assertion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"Proof by assertion, sometimes informally referred to as proof by repeated assertion, is an informal fallacy in which a proposition is repeatedly restated regardless of contradiction.[1] Sometimes, this may be repeated until challenges dry up, at which point it is asserted as fact due to its not being contradicted (argumentum ad nauseam).["

 

[BlueGin]

The "ignore" button itself is of limited use. I rarely use it. Because when trolls get personal (and they do) I want to know about it. And their messages are there in the quote boxes of other's replies anyway.

And I would find a troll destroying the credibility of MY political persuasion to be more annoying than wrecking someone else's apple cart..

PS.. Can we have this discussion WITHOUT naming names?? Would be nicer... Just sayin..
Even if you're absolving them of trollishness..

You seem to have more seconds left in your life than I do and I dont want to waste them reading the posts of morons, trolls and ignoramuses.

There are plenty of opposing views here that are cogent and rational that I dont miss a thing by ignoring the trolls. In fact, it is a very nice place to exchange thoughts and perspectives without the trolls mucking everything up.

Each to his own, I guess, but time is too precious to use on annoying drivel.

Especially when a lot of those ignoramuses are folks with duplicate accounts or that participate in password sharing.

 

[BlueGin]

But I consider A LOT of the common talking heads that repeatedly appear on cable TV or radio to spin and attack ----- as trolls too.. They are not there to discuss the topic. They have their own agendas.

Yes, I can see that. They're not answering the interviewers' questions, they're just spouting off talking points and attacking the other "side". They're contributing nothing, they're not advancing the topic at hand in any meaningful way.
.

Often I see trolls not just contributing nothing, but actively trying to prevent others from being able to have a discussion.

IMO, it is often used by partisans as a tool to prevent information or points from being made that they want suppressed.

Which includes both political and general discussions .

 

[flacaltenn]

Hello all. Trolling is something I have been accused of and that bothers me. I tend not to insult, be loud and offending and make every attempt to not be that way. I also tend to monitor conversations with the idea in mind, such as this particular conversation, to learn and understand. If I choose to enter then it is generally with a comment in which I may agree or disagree with the OP on that subject. For me, defining trolling is difficult. I find some folks boorish but does that make them a troll? I feel perhaps not. Maybe they are simply boorish. Perhaps they are insultingly crude. OK, but perhaps they are genuine in their speech. I do not care for vulgarity in any sense, however there are folks whose every other word is "fuck". It bothers me and when it does I go elsewhere. I choose to join a conversation based on how i feel about that conversation and place much of my attention on how others conduct themselves. However, should I decide to join that conversation, then the onus is upon myself to follow the lines of reason presented. Trolls, in my experience, lack or do not accept that form of rational. I find this entire conversation important and reveling in that most who have responded, in my view are, some of the more responsible USMB members, a group I have not become a part of. In closing, the problem with every definition of a troll is that they are very general and open. Does anyone have a defination of trolling which is outside of the canned study troll? What in hell constitutes a "TROLL"?

Trolls come in a lot of varieties. But they all fit the description of a nasty beast who lives under a bridge and challenges anyone to pass by. (see Norwegian folklore for pix and a description) Some trolls will drop into a thread to defend the indefensible. Just to be contrary and stir things up. They don't really BELIEVE their position. Their goal is to screw with a target or a set of targets. Maybe force their targets to get into trouble with the rules of the board.

Others are one note bagpipe bands. Just plain annoying and constantly on the SAME rant that everyone has heard before. Often repeat the phrases over and over again. As far as moderation goes -- you cannot troll in a single post. There has to be that signature pattern of ignoring the topic and dragging the convo (and it's victims) off into the weeds. Whether that's done thru bad or evil humor or personal attacks or just fixation on irrelevant things -- it's all annoying. .

 

[JoeMoma]

Sometimes I think I engage in trollish behavior. However, I usually use what I consider to be good manners (no personal insults) unless someone is rude to me first. By trollish behavior, I might drop into a thread and make a joke or post a viedo if I see an opening. Sometimes I will take on the role of devils advocate or use sarcasm. Often the writen word leaves out the smile and wink that sets the context of in person conversation.

 

[I amso IR]

As far as moderation goes -- you cannot troll in a single post. There has to be that signature pattern of ignoring the topic and dragging the convo (and it's victims) off into the weeds. Whether that's done thru bad or evil humor or personal attacks or just fixation on irrelevant things -- it's all annoying. .

I like that Florida, California, Tennessee. Finally a common sense answer which does not require a PHd to understand. Don't get me wrong, education is a beautiful thing and a worthy challenge. But there is also beauty in simplicity and "there has to be that signature pattern of ignoring the topic and dragging the convo (and it's victims) off into the weeds" fits that bill perfectly. Thank you for responding. Now I will quietly go my way and not bother anyone. Pleased to make your company, I am so IR

 

[boedicca]

Trolling is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[jon_berzerk]

who cares

if someone has such a inferior complex

that they feed to need to display puppets

so be it

--LOL@DAPUPPETS

 

[Correll]

Hello all. Trolling is something I have been accused of and that bothers me. I tend not to insult, be loud and offending and make every attempt to not be that way. I also tend to monitor conversations with the idea in mind, such as this particular conversation, to learn and understand. If I choose to enter then it is generally with a comment in which I may agree or disagree with the OP on that subject. For me, defining trolling is difficult. I find some folks boorish but does that make them a troll? I feel perhaps not. Maybe they are simply boorish. Perhaps they are insultingly crude. OK, but perhaps they are genuine in their speech. I do not care for vulgarity in any sense, however there are folks whose every other word is "fuck". It bothers me and when it does I go elsewhere. I choose to join a conversation based on how i feel about that conversation and place much of my attention on how others conduct themselves. However, should I decide to join that conversation, then the onus is upon myself to follow the lines of reason presented. Trolls, in my experience, lack or do not accept that form of rational. I find this entire conversation important and reveling in that most who have responded, in my view are, some of the more responsible USMB members, a group I have not become a part of. In closing, the problem with every definition of a troll is that they are very general and open. Does anyone have a defination of trolling which is outside of the canned study troll? What in hell constitutes a "TROLL"?

Trolls come in a lot of varieties. But they all fit the description of a nasty beast who lives under a bridge and challenges anyone to pass by. (see Norwegian folklore for pix and a description) Some trolls will drop into a thread to defend the indefensible. Just to be contrary and stir things up. They don't really BELIEVE their position. Their goal is to screw with a target or a set of targets. Maybe force their targets to get into trouble with the rules of the board.

Others are one note bagpipe bands. Just plain annoying and constantly on the SAME rant that everyone has heard before. Often repeat the phrases over and over again. As far as moderation goes -- you cannot troll in a single post. There has to be that signature pattern of ignoring the topic and dragging the convo (and it's victims) off into the weeds. Whether that's done thru bad or evil humor or personal attacks or just fixation on irrelevant things -- it's all annoying. .

The goal of purposefully inciting anger in a target in order to goad them into a rules violation to get them banned is an extreme and disgusting variant of trolling.

 

[Correll]

Trolling is in the eye of the beholder.

No, it's not.

 

[Correll]

Sometimes I think I engage in trollish behavior. However, I usually use what I consider to be good manners (no personal insults) unless someone is rude to me first. By trollish behavior, I might drop into a thread and make a joke or post a viedo if I see an opening. Sometimes I will take on the role of devils advocate or use sarcasm. Often the writen word leaves out the smile and wink that sets the context of in person conversation.

What you describe is not trolling.

It would be a very rare troll to use "good manners" and still manage to troll.

It would be a very rare troll to NOT use personal insults.

Do your sarcastic comments have a real point to make about the topic in question?

 

[Mac1958]

The goal of purposefully inciting anger in a target in order to goad them into a rules violation to get them banned is an extreme and disgusting variant of trolling.

Yeah, there has been some of that in this thread, a poster trying to disrupt, derail, incite.

Which is just delicious in its irony, being in a thread about trolling.
.

 

[Mac1958]

So, gang, what is your opinion of the reason behind the specific troll behavior I mention in the OP?

One theory is that it is a display of a level of sadism, of Machiavellian, psychopathic behavior.

Another is that it is a negative impulse that is essentially lubricated by the anonymity of the internet.

Or some combination therein, which seems likeliest to me.

Thoughts?
.

 

[Mac1958]

So, gang, what is your opinion of the reason behind the specific troll behavior I mention in the OP?

One theory is that it is a display of a level of sadism, of Machiavellian, psychopathic behavior.

Another is that it is a negative impulse that is essentially lubricated by the anonymity of the internet.

Or some combination therein, which seems likeliest to me.

Thoughts?
.

Why do you do it?

I'd say because you feel powerless in real life.

That said calling those that disagree with you trolls makes you look partisan.

Could be, you bet.

Thank you for the contribution, and for providing more vivid material for my point.

An example of how they almost can't help themselves, they have to make it personal and nasty - the "impulse" in the post of mine that she quotes.

Thanks again, always appreciated.
.