CDZ The Psychology of Trolling

[Fair&Balanced]

The offer to present verbal combat is fine with me. The problem is the nature of the combat TV networks stage. My idea of verbal combat is this not this. The latter is just sh*t, a waste of time to watch. I suppose folks of dubious intellect and little substance may find the latter entertaining. I don't, but more importantly, I don't watch politicians to be entertained.

Your idea of a real political discussion is the ideal of a debate, but of course I doubt that most of our politicians are up to such heights of erudite finesse, but perhaps they could at least adopt the decorum and reflection of this.

No one would watch. Americans WANT what we have now.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The offer to present verbal combat is fine with me. The problem is the nature of the combat TV networks stage. My idea of verbal combat is this not this. The latter is just sh*t, a waste of time to watch. I suppose folks of dubious intellect and little substance may find the latter entertaining. I don't, but more importantly, I don't watch politicians to be entertained.

Your idea of a real political discussion is the ideal of a debate, but of course I doubt that most of our politicians are up to such heights of erudite finesse, but perhaps they could at least adopt the decorum and reflection of this.

No one would watch. Americans WANT what we have now.

I think that they could be helped up to a better form of discussion.

There is no edifying point to the current pile of sheise we have now, so why maintain it? Well the networks want to sell more advertising time, and that no matter how much damage it does to the nation as a whole, so it could only come about by social pressure and economic pressure to do better.

And just leave those who prefer baboon poop throwing to themselves.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

The offer to present verbal combat is fine with me. The problem is the nature of the combat TV networks stage. My idea of verbal combat is this not this. The latter is just sh*t, a waste of time to watch. I suppose folks of dubious intellect and little substance may find the latter entertaining. I don't, but more importantly, I don't watch politicians to be entertained.

Your idea of a real political discussion is the ideal of a debate, but of course I doubt that most of our politicians are up to such heights of erudite finesse, but perhaps they could at least adopt the decorum and reflection of this.

No one would watch. Americans WANT what we have now.

I think that they could be helped up to a better form of discussion.

There is no edifying point to the current pile of sheise we have now, so why maintain it? Well the networks want to sell more advertising time, and that no matter how much damage it does to the nation as a whole, so it could only come about by social pressure and economic pressure to do better.

And just leave those who prefer baboon poop throwing to themselves.

How can you have reasonable discourse when 90% of folks won't even admit simple facts are in fact facts? This board shows that clearly. I could post "the sky is blue" and someone would immediately retort with "link? prove your claim" then if I deigned to actually provide such a ridiculous request they would respond with "that's your source? LOL That's a stupid source" and go right on with their ridiculous argument.

 

[JimBowie1958]

How can you have reasonable discourse when 90% of folks won't even admit simple facts are in fact facts? This board shows that clearly. I could post "the sky is blue" and someone would immediately retort with "link? prove your claim" then if I deigned to actually provide such a ridiculous request they would respond with "that's your source? LOL That's a stupid source" and go right on with their ridiculous argument.

Well some humility is a bit of a requirement, and a stronger commitment to honesty and integrity than to 'winning' the discussion.

But bearing in mind that people across the spectrum are more desirous of peace and mutual prosperity than of poverty and insecurity we can find common ground for discussion as long as we agree to shun the dishonest, the ideologues who think there is no Truth outside their own system of thought, and who also share a commitment to uplift those who they do not have familiarity but who do share the common bonds of American citizenship and humanity. Personally I would also add a Judeo-Christian moral framework but though that is helpful it is not critical.

This discussion between the 'archconservative' William F Buckley Jr and his ideological opposite, Saul Alinsky, shows restraint, humility, reason and a common goal of edifying each other and the audience.

Is that so utterly boring? It is certainly more educational and promotes more understanding.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

How can you have reasonable discourse when 90% of folks won't even admit simple facts are in fact facts? This board shows that clearly. I could post "the sky is blue" and someone would immediately retort with "link? prove your claim" then if I deigned to actually provide such a ridiculous request they would respond with "that's your source? LOL That's a stupid source" and go right on with their ridiculous argument.

Well some humility is a bit of a requirement, and a stronger commitment to honesty and integrity than to 'winning' the discussion.

But bearing in mind that people across the spectrum are more desirous of peace and mutual prosperity than of poverty and insecurity we can find common ground for discussion as long as we agree to shun the dishonest, the ideologues who think there is no Truth outside their own system of thought, and who also share a commitment to uplift those who they do not have familiarity but who do share the common bonds of American citizenship and humanity. Personally I would also add a Judeo-Christian moral framework but though that is helpful it is not critical.

This discussion between the 'archconservative' William F Buckley Jr and his ideological opposite, Saul Alinsky, shows restraint, humility, reason and a common goal of edifying each other and the audience.

Is that so utterly boring? It is certainly more educational and promotes more understanding.

We can't even people to adhere to those standards in a single sub forum on this message board. Sorry , I've lost faith in the average American.

 

[eflatminor]

One word: Truthmatters

 

[JimBowie1958]

We can't even people to adhere to those standards in a single sub forum on this message board. Sorry , I've lost faith in the average American.

The Clean Debate Zone is fairly successful as the Mods work over time there, it seems.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

We can't even people to adhere to those standards in a single sub forum on this message board. Sorry , I've lost faith in the average American.

The Clean Debate Zone is fairly successful as the Mods work over time there, it seems.

The mods do a fairly good job of keeping the name calling and such out , I agree. what I'm talking about is the things that are not against the rules. Post facts in here and no one says " well this is the CDZ so let's have a higher level of discourse" no they still do the usual bickering over whether things actually ARE facts.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The mods do a fairly good job of keeping the name calling and such out , I agree. what I'm talking about is the things that are not against the rules. Post facts in here and no one says " well this is the CDZ so let's have a higher level of discourse" no they still do the usual bickering over whether things actually ARE facts.

I havent seen that, but then again, I generally just put the nitwits on ignore.

So perhaps I cannot argue this particular point with you as I dont suffer nitwits.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

The mods do a fairly good job of keeping the name calling and such out , I agree. what I'm talking about is the things that are not against the rules. Post facts in here and no one says " well this is the CDZ so let's have a higher level of discourse" no they still do the usual bickering over whether things actually ARE facts.

I havent seen that, but then again, I generally just put the nitwits on ignore.

So perhaps I cannot argue this particular point with you as I dont suffer nitwits.

Sadly, I will LOL I'll stuff facts at someone until they either place me on ignore or they surrender to my will.

 

[Holos]

For the purposes of this thread, 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.

Before continuing to build an argument on the topic, I first have to make clear that the behavior so described isn't simply an online, computer-continued behavior. It's an actual visceral, street psychosis.

The posts reacted to aren't just messages with words and letters, they are actual volumes, densities and utility/power, the things that light the streets in a row at night.

The articles reacted to, likewise, aren't just messages with words and letters, they are actual objects with volume and density, the usual product you can find for sale in any corner street store.

The columns reacted to also, are not just messages with words and letters, not just personal opinions, they are actual architecture structures, cylindrical pillars providing stability to a building.

Reacting to these things isn't just "internet trolling", but it's a trespassing lack of personal control, an unrecognized, malfunctioning psycho-osmosis (psychosis) mostly impacting those people's daily lives, and not so much the lives of people that may encounter them online or the people that may encounter the messages they leave online.

Why do people do this? Specifically, what internal need is being met by this behavior?

I think "Why does it happen?" would be a more appropriate question, since our healthy organisms are given both sympathetic and autonomous nervous functions since we are born, from which our cognitive abilities develop and make decisions to continue enhancing the totality of the organism and therefore of each person's experience.

My comprehension is that the behavior manifests itself after prolonged intoxication through which the cognitive abilities and the sympathetic and autonomous nervous system functions become disassociated. What is perceived isn't recognized as perception, information processing and information development, but is impulsively reacted to as an already partially-unconscious opportunity for purging the intoxicants that at this point have already become a deteriorating, chronic condition.

trolling – like other forms of computer-mediated communication – unleashes people’s impulses by providing anonymity and temporary identity loss.

I do not agree with the idea that anonymity and temporary identity loss are a provision in anyway whatsoever, or that in anyway those two conditions benefit a citizen with lawful human, animal, and environmental rights (established by centuries of civilization, thousands of years of human and animal relationships, and millions of years of successful planetary evolution).

Furthermore, I would also have to disagree that computer-mediated communication unleashes people's impulses, since we are speaking of advanced machinery which runs on the basis of complex mathematics. Unleashed impulse would not have the control necessary to manipulate the fragile exactness computers require for their continued activities of exercising human intelligence and providing human communication.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Sadly, I will LOL I'll stuff facts at someone until they either place me on ignore or they surrender to my will.

Most trolls do it for the LOLs, but a good many of them get their LOLs from seeing how far they can string you along with the least letter-to-letter ratio of your response to thier provocations.

Typical are troll posts half a sentence asking a question that is just stupid, but a conservative will take the bait and post several paragraphs in response, to which the troll will ask yet another stupid half sentence question and get another multi-paragraph response, then rinse and repeat.

They give themselves extra points if they can get you to respond with some kind of exasperation.

I just put them on ignore after telling them to piss off the first time.

Why play their stupid games?

 

[JimBowie1958]

I do not agree with the idea that anonymity and temporary identity loss are a provision in anyway whatsoever, or that in anyway those two conditions benefit a citizen with lawful human, animal, and environmental rights (established by centuries of civilization, thousands of years of human and animal relationships, and millions of years of successful planetary evolution).
Furthermore, I would also have to disagree that computer-mediated communication unleashes people's impulses, since we are speaking of advanced machinery which runs on the basis of complex mathematics. Unleashed impulse would not have the control necessary to manipulate the fragile exactness computers require for their continued activities of exercising human intelligence and providing human communication.

But what if the machinery ran on the basis of complex Quantum Mechanics instead. Could you accept it is a genuine problem then?

lol

 

[Holos]

I do not agree with the idea that anonymity and temporary identity loss are a provision in anyway whatsoever, or that in anyway those two conditions benefit a citizen with lawful human, animal, and environmental rights (established by centuries of civilization, thousands of years of human and animal relationships, and millions of years of successful planetary evolution).
Furthermore, I would also have to disagree that computer-mediated communication unleashes people's impulses, since we are speaking of advanced machinery which runs on the basis of complex mathematics. Unleashed impulse would not have the control necessary to manipulate the fragile exactness computers require for their continued activities of exercising human intelligence and providing human communication.

But what if the machinery ran on the basis of complex Quantum Mechanics instead. Could you accept it is a genuine problem then?

lol

I do not understand your question. What is it that you are questioning to be a genuine problem? Are you referring to machinery work itself, some kind of automatically generated response, I press the "A" key and an "A" shows on the screen?

 

[JimBowie1958]

I do not understand your question. What is it that you are questioning to be a genuine problem? Are you referring to machinery work itself, some kind of automatically generated response, I press the "A" key and an "A" shows on the screen?

I was being sarcastic regarding your disbelief that anonymity causes an increase in rude behavior.

 

[Holos]

I do not understand your question. What is it that you are questioning to be a genuine problem? Are you referring to machinery work itself, some kind of automatically generated response, I press the "A" key and an "A" shows on the screen?

I was being sarcastic regarding your disbelief that anonymity causes an increase in rude behavior.

I recognized your "laughing" acronym, but it does not seem you recognized the information I exposed in my post.

Anonymity isn't a cause, and cannot be, by it's very ontological, philosophical nature. Anonymity is a method for a process, both of which are procedures that begin with a cause but that do not frame nor address the totality of a cause nor they can reach alone an intended effect. Essence and substance may be evaded by categories, but an evasion of categories made a priority cannot supplant nor include essence or substance.

Also, rude behavior, if you did not pursue English as a continued learning but took sling-slang as emotionally sufficient, is rudimentary behavior and not apolitical, aggressive behavior. Rudimentary is a synonym for fundamental, for primary, and usually has a chronological reference and not a categorical reference.

Anonymity may in fact be associated to rudimentary behavior in the sense that there is yet a planned, future goal to be achieved, as in the case of an anonymous poem, an anonymous painting, an anonymous donation. But it isn't anonymity which causes the poem, the painting, the donation.

I have not disbelieved in anything.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Anonymity isn't a cause, and cannot be, by it's very ontological, philosophical nature.

Yes, anonymity can be a cause, dude.

Where do you get this nonsense?

Do you think that robbers sometimes wear masks because it is a fashion statement?

You are on my ignore list, I am sorry, but I just dont have the time.

 

[jillian]

It could just be that you are a whiny dumb ass who can't take criticism and deserves to be shyt upon. Or something else.


The above was meant to be funny, please untie shorts as required.

I've been called worse!


.

and by better.

 

[Indeependent]

I am EXACTLY the same face to face as I am on this board.
If you make sense, I listen.
If you're misinformed, I inform you.
If you're an idiotic ideologue, I use another topic to lead you back to the first topic to make you realize where you're being an idiotic ideologue.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Sadly, I will LOL I'll stuff facts at someone until they either place me on ignore or they surrender to my will.

Most trolls do it for the LOLs, but a good many of them get their LOLs from seeing how far they can string you along with the least letter-to-letter ratio of your response to thier provocations.

Typical are troll posts half a sentence asking a question that is just stupid, but a conservative will take the bait and post several paragraphs in response, to which the troll will ask yet another stupid half sentence question and get another multi-paragraph response, then rinse and repeat.

They give themselves extra points if they can get you to respond with some kind of exasperation.

I just put them on ignore after telling them to piss off the first time.

Why play their stupid games?

Yes, and another trick of theirs is to ask and ask and ask questions , demand answers then when you ask them a question, they give no answers LOL