Do "we" use the word "Trolling" a little too liberally?

[Seattle]

What do you think, is "trolling" overused in discussions, generally speaking?

It should be used for "I think science is full of crap, what do you think?" on a science forum. Or "you're not man enough to bring that up to xxx member directly", meaning it's said just to piss someone off.

The overuse of the word today, seems to be the main use, as in I disagree with you, you must not believe something that I don't believe, so it must be trolling.

 

[Pinball1970]

What do you think, is "trolling" overused in discussions, generally speaking?

It should be used for "I think science is full of crap, what do you think?" on a science forum. Or "you're not man enough to bring that up to xxx member directly", meaning it's said just to piss someone off.

The overuse of the word today, seems to be the main use, as in I disagree with you, you must not believe something that I don't believe, so it must be trolling.

It's better than calling a member a cunt.

 

[Seattle]

It's better than calling a member a cunt.

Drinking I see.
It's also the most common reason for a temporary ban on here.

 

[Pinball1970]

Drinking I see.
It's also the most common reason for a temporary ban on here.

No. I am guilty of breaking the rules in that way so "troll" is better.

 

[Seattle]

No. I am guilty of breaking the rules in that way so "troll" is better.

Troll is better in polite society, for example. If it's used to ban, it's the same thing.

 

[wegs]

Yes…it’s often overused on here, or misused. To me, trolling means purposely trying to hijack a discussion to insult or start an argument, mainly to get reactions of others. A troll isn’t interested in genuinely wanting to have any kind of discussion, he/she is just stirring the pot. So, using the term troll simply because you disagree with someone, I just don’t define it like that. Being objective, I honestly think trolling is about getting under someone’s skin, and that’s the only reason the “troll” enters the discussion.

Are you being called a troll, Seattle? lol

 

[Tiassa]

To me, trolling means purposely trying to hijack a discussion to insult or start an argument, mainly to get reactions of others.

Aye. In American parlance, it refers to both fishing, i.e., trailing some bait behind a slow boat and waiting to see who bites, and the fabulous-literary pretense of a troll under a bridge who presents arbitrary challenges to progress. I expect the latter is a more general English-language thing, but don't know how our international neighbors waste the day drinking beer in a small boat.

 

[Seattle]

Yes…it’s often overused on here, or misused. To me, trolling means purposely trying to hijack a discussion to insult or start an argument, mainly to get reactions of others. A troll isn’t interested in genuinely wanting to have any kind of discussion, he/she is just stirring the pot. So, using the term troll simply because you disagree with someone, I just don’t define it like that. Being objective, I honestly think trolling is about getting under someone’s skin, and that’s the only reason the “troll” enters the discussion.

Are you being called a troll, Seattle? lol

Apparently

 

[exchemist]

It's better than calling a member a cunt.

Yes that is the thermonuclear option, at least in British English. I think I have used it twice on this forum, in the space of 13 years here. But these things vary according to national culture. Quite why the female genitalia should be considered so offensive when the source of delight to men I have never really worked out. The French equivalent, "con", is used with much more abandon, more or less equivalent in strength of insult to our "arsehole".

My favourite anecdote about Charles de Gaulle is when he was once being driven past once of the frequent demonstrations (manifestations) one gets in France and someone else in the car pointed out to him a guy holding a placard simply saying: "MORT AUX CONS!" . De Gaulle apparently waved his hand dismissively and laconically remarked: "Vaste entreprise." He was not wrong.

 

[exchemist]

Yes…it’s often overused on here, or misused. To me, trolling means purposely trying to hijack a discussion to insult or start an argument, mainly to get reactions of others. A troll isn’t interested in genuinely wanting to have any kind of discussion, he/she is just stirring the pot. So, using the term troll simply because you disagree with someone, I just don’t define it like that. Being objective, I honestly think trolling is about getting under someone’s skin, and that’s the only reason the “troll” enters the discussion.

Are you being called a troll, Seattle? lol

I don't think it necessarily has to be hijacking of the the thread topic. But yes it has to be stirring up an argument just to make trouble, either for the forum or for an individual the troll has picked on.

 

[Baldeee]

So would posting an unprovoked insult without addressing the point that was raised be considered trolling?
Is it fair to ask that person to stop trolling?
Or would doing so itself be considered trolling?
How about when the person doesn't stop, insults the person unprovoked again, and still doesn't address the issue at hand?
Is asking that person again to stop trolling - is that now trolling?

Does it change your view if the person doing the insulting is a moderator?

 

[Seattle]

So would posting an unprovoked insult without addressing the point that was raised be considered trolling?
Is it fair to ask that person to stop trolling?
Or would doing so itself be considered trolling?
How about when the person doesn't stop, insults the person unprovoked again, and still doesn't address the issue at hand?
Is asking that person again to stop trolling - is that now trolling?

Does it change your view if the person doing the insulting is a moderator?

That's the problem. I could disagree with you, warn you for trolling and then insult you with the only purpose being to piss you off and that, too, would be trolling.

So it's a frequent double standard and it's broad enough that it can be applied (or not) at will.

It's much better, IMO, to just leave out the insults and warn for trolling only in the most extreme (and obvious) cases.

 

[Seattle]

Yes that is the thermonuclear option, at least in British English. I think I have used it twice on this forum, in the space of 13 years here. But these things vary according to national culture. Quite why the female genitalia should be considered so offensive when the source of delight to men I have never really worked out. The French equivalent, "con", is used with much more abandon, more or less equivalent in strength of insult to our "arsehole".

My favourite anecdote about Charles de Gaulle is when he was once being driven past once of the frequent demonstrations (manifestations) one gets in France and someone else in the car pointed out to him a guy holding a placard simply saying: "MORT AUX CONS!" . De Gaulle apparently waved his hand dismissively and laconically remarked: "Vaste entreprise." He was not wrong.

It's not really used here that way by a guy to another guy. In person you'd probably get a reaction that you wouldn't like.

 

[geordief]

Yes that is the thermonuclear option, at least in British English. I think I have used it twice on this forum, in the space of 13 years here. But these things vary according to national culture. Quite why the female genitalia should be considered so offensive when the source of delight to men I have never really worked out. The French equivalent, "con", is used with much more abandon, more or less equivalent in strength of insult to our "arsehole".

My favourite anecdote about Charles de Gaulle is when he was once being driven past once of the frequent demonstrations (manifestations) one gets in France and someone else in the car pointed out to him a guy holding a placard simply saying: "MORT AUX CONS!" . De Gaulle apparently waved his hand dismissively and laconically remarked: "Vaste entreprise." He was not wrong.

There is also the expression "La culture, c'est comme la confiture, moins on en a, plus on l'étale"

It could also apply to swear words in the sense that , the more they are used ,the less impact they have .

And the inverse.

I wonder what they use in France when they really want to insult.

(I had a friend in Montmartre,Paris who introduced me to his "Bresilien"* friend.

When he was gone I remarked that he,my friend was obviously "pédé"**

He took no offence but to deny it (which I don't understand to this day-il est mort du Sida)

"

*the days when sex operations were just (I think) starting and Brazilians were seemingly first adopters.

**I think "pédé" is /was way stronger than "con

 

[James R]

It's also the most common reason for a temporary ban on here.

No. Temporary bans are automatic, based on the number of active warning points a person has.

Of course, if a person is often warned for trolling, then sooner or later it is likely that a temporary ban will ensue following yet another instance of the person failing to heed all the previous warnings.

In my estimation, the most common reason I issue warnings is for personal insults directed by one member against another. More extreme cases of personal insults can attract a warning for flaming.

The core feature of trolling is various types of dishonesty, combined with an intent to provoke an angry reaction. It is true that here on sciforums we see quite a lot of dishonesty from some people, and quite a lot of baiting. When they persist in that over a period of time, it is not unusual for them to be warned for trolling.

 

[James R]

To me, trolling means purposely trying to hijack a discussion to insult or start an argument, mainly to get reactions of others. A troll isn’t interested in genuinely wanting to have any kind of discussion, he/she is just stirring the pot. So, using the term troll simply because you disagree with someone, I just don’t define it like that. Being objective, I honestly think trolling is about getting under someone’s skin, and that’s the only reason the “troll” enters the discussion.

+1 for this!

In fact, this is pretty much how trolling is defined in our published posting guidelines.

 

[TheVat]

Yes…it’s often overused on here, or misused. To me, trolling means purposely trying to hijack a discussion to insult or start an argument, mainly to get reactions of others. A troll isn’t interested in genuinely wanting to have any kind of discussion, he/she is just stirring the pot.

Hey, someone actually posted the correct definition of a word. Champagne!

Yes that's the definition in use when I admin'd a website. And yes to OP, the term can be applied over-broadly to all kinds of rowdy or bad faith kinds of discourse.

When I was an admin, one of the worst was "circling." Basically, a point of discussion is settled (hopefully by an appeal to solid facts), but then participants keep circling back to that point, as if the prior discussion had never happened. It's like dogs playing tugowar with old sneakers. You keep putting the sneakers away, they keep pulling them from the closet.

 

[Baldeee]

Definition given above: "trolling means purposely trying to hijack a discussion to insult or start an argument, mainly to get reactions of others. A troll isn’t interested in genuinely wanting to have any kind of discussion, he/she is just stirring the pot."

Okay, with that definition of trolling in mind, I return to the example I raised above.
Please can someone help clarify the following examples:

First: would it be trolling when someone, in responding to a valid on-topic point that was made, instead of addressing it just insults the person who raised it and tells them to "grow up"?

Second: if the person who made the valid point, and who had been insulted, tells that other person to please not troll, and then explains the appropriateness/relevance/validity of the point that the other person didn't address, is that trolling?

Third: if the person who had insulted the other member then brushes away the request not to troll, proceeds to insult the person again, while still not actually engaging with the valid point that had been raised, is that trolling?

Fourth: if the person, now having been insulted twice, explains why he considered the person to have been trolling, again asks the other person not to troll, and again explains why the point he raised is valid and why the other person has not yet addressed it with their comments, is that now to be considered trolling?
If not all, which part in particular is trolling?
The willingness and encouraging to engage on the valid issue that had been raised?
Asking the other person not to troll?


Please can some kind person offer their views on these.
There are no trick questions.

 

[wegs]

When I was an admin, one of the worst was "circling." Basically, a point of discussion is settled (hopefully by an appeal to solid facts), but then participants keep circling back to that point, as if the prior discussion had never happened. It's like dogs playing tugowar with old sneakers. You keep putting the sneakers away, they keep pulling them from the closet.

I think that we all accept that ''risk'' of becoming active forum members, though - there could be newbies who open a particular thread that maybe the regulars have already run through a million times, and then the regulars feel the need to rehash the same subject matter. It never hurts to awaken the dead horse, and start the beatings again, though. Right? lol

 

[wegs]

First: would it be trolling when someone, in responding to a valid on-topic point that was made, instead of addressing it just insults the person who raised it and tells them to "grow up"? - In my opinion, someone telling another member to 'grow up,' isn't trolling. Although, context matters - if the person who posts ''grow up,'' has had a genuine argument with the other member, but the other member keeps feigning ignorance (hypothetically lol) - then, that person might be tired of explaining themselves.

Second: if the person who made the valid point, and who had been insulted, tells that other person to please not troll, and then explains the appropriateness/relevance/validity of the point that the other person didn't address, is that trolling? - Again, just my opinion, but no, this isn't an example of trolling. I feel at this point, moderators should simply issue a warning that tells both to get back on track with the subject, and ''discuss the topic, not the member.''

Third: if the person who had insulted the other member then brushes away the request not to troll, proceeds to insult the person again, while still not actually engaging with the valid point that had been raised, is that trolling? - Still not trolling, just reacting to the other member, and I'd refer to the above, it would be helpful for a mod to insert a simple ''don't name call each other, keep the topic on track.''

Fourth: if the person, now having been insulted twice, explains why he considered the person to have been trolling, again asks the other person not to troll, and again explains why the point he raised is valid and why the other person has not yet addressed it with their comments, is that now to be considered trolling?
If not all, which part in particular is trolling?
The willingness and encouraging to engage on the valid issue that had been raised?
Asking the other person not to troll? - It's still not trolling imo, because if the person telling the other (well intentioned?) member to 'grow up,' and the discussion starts to take a different direction, and everyone else starts piling on the member who is posting things that might be in good faith, then it's really just a distraction and the mod should continue with the warnings. I think if someone joins a science site to post things that they know are not facts on whatever topic it is, but they push it as though they were facts, then they should expect push back. ''Grow up,'' strikes me as a comment someone makes when they're worn down, and have no interest in trying to convince the other member of anything. I think trolling would be if the person being insulted is purposely posting ignorant things, pretending to be genuine, only to get under other members' skin. It's hard to definitively pick out trolling under just one example - for me, trolls reveal themselves when the behavior is repeated, and starts forming a pattern.

Please can some kind person offer their views on these.
There are no trick questions.

My answers are above in blue. I hope this helps, but again, it's just my opinion.