Forum function: "Trolls" vs "Sheep?"

Post Reply New Topic

@haidouk: The moderators simply work enforcing the site rules and terms of service. Members are expected to observe those rules of behaviour on the site. It is quite simple really. A simplified version of the rules is:
Don't make direct personal attacks on other members or call them nasty names - however, you can disagree with their ideas, comments and beliefs.

A site such as this needs rules and moderators to enforce those rules simply to ensure civility. To use your metaphor - ensure the occasional wolf doesn't go around attacking and devouring the sheep. In that sense you can think of moderators as shepherds!

But if someone posts something and they full well know it will upset people but they post it anyway because it's their honest opinion and they have the right to express it, is that still trolling or being provocative? Even if they aren't posting it to cause trouble or to not to make anyone mad but they know it may but do it anyway?

The poster's reasons & intentions are irrelevant. What matters is what the forum community thinks. If they think he/she is causing problems then he/she is considered a troll

But does it actually mean they are one, even if it's not intentional? Can someone be a troll unintentionally?

The wikipedia says it has to be done with intent.

I've been a toll unintentionally & was petitioned by other members to be banned because I was judged to be a troll even thou I never intended to cause any problems. Trolling is relative & each forum community or members in it decide what is trolling & who is a troll

So do I need to be seen as a troll by some members or by a whole lot to be one? I have been accused of one and seen as one by several of the old mods and some members here so I don't know if that would mean I was one.

If one member sees someone as a troll, does it make that person a troll and if other people don't see them as one, they are not one? But only are to that one person?

It matters not how many members think you are a troll

A prominent contemporary source defines "troll" as: "One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument."

As savvy board-users, what is your definition of "troll"? And what is your view on "provocation" as a principle? What is your subjective view on positive and negative in these things?

Being pointedly rude is one thing. However posting provocative and thoughtful commentary--precisely in order to introduce alternate perspectives and to shake up the status quo, which one personally finds unbearable and oppressive? A person with AS (at least as I have and experience it) would be opposed to this, exactly why? Why is the "troll" not an archetype CELEBRATED by the AS community? Literally "the provocative one". And why would social niceties and everyone getting along be an ideal that Aspies would want to adopt, at the expense of the essential and AS-chracteristic ideal of provocation?

Again, clearly there are distinctions between provocation and provocation, "Your mother is ugly!" is clearly stupid provocation. However pointed debate about controversial things--on the basis of rational viewpoints???? Forgive me, but to dismiss such things as "trolling" is frankly a disturbing phenomenon that HAS to be addressed in a community that values such things as intellectual honesty, independence, etc. People--PARTICULARLY DISEMPOWERED PEOPLE--Clearly have to be able to SPEAK without being intimidated about potentially "saying the thing the authorities don't like". This is essential in any forum that is valuable, intellectually honest, and a true social resource (this, as opposed to those that exist simply as inane capitalist enterprises).

I argue that new standards and conceptions are essential. The standard distinction is nonsensical. A "troll" would be essentially anyone who is provocative or who introduces new or revolutionary perspectives... vs a sheep--who would be someone very social, nice and noncontroversial, (which would be the standard view of the NT). So why would we have an ostensibly AS-centric board... which stigmatizes and seeks to restrict specifically AS-centric intellectual or social thinking and interaction types? I don't get this.

My response here will be pretty simple compared to the 1s so far. I'm not a deep thinker & these questions are complicated. Anyways... I've been accused of being a troll on other forums in the past because I posted controversial topics when I was upset. I ranted alot about things because posting was a way for me to help analyze & sort things out. i didn't explain myself well sometimes(or lots of times) members took things the wrong way; they assumed I meant or was implying things or that I was intentionally trying to disagree with them for the sake of arguing when I was really trying to sort things out with myself. They told me things that I took personally & I tried to argue/explain but said the wrong thing & then they become upset with me. I unintentionally caused controversy on post others started partly because of my negative history; they took things I said the wrong way that they wouldn't of for others because of their impression of me. I said things that caused other members to disagree with each other which caused problems that really wasn't my intent & then they sort of thought I was internally casing problems & I got the label of troll.
My personal definition of a troll is someone who does things like attacking/flaming/insulting other members; spreading negative lies or rumors about members or the owners/admin/webmasters; violating forum rules for kicks like making post they know will get deleted or bragging about how they got warned or how they caused problems.

It matters not how many members think you are a troll if any of the 1s who do think you are have the power or influence to have you banned for trolling. If the only members who do think you are trolling don't have the power or influence to have any action taken against you for trolling; iit doesn't matter if they see you as one or not

COUGH! COUGH! COUGH!

Excuse me!

This thread is thick with smoke- what with all of you burning martyrs here!

Well...give us some examples of your saintliness- and "revolutionary ideas".

Show us your miraculous stuff.

Maybe we will canonize you.

So I was just curious about something.
Say someone had described their sensory issues. And say another someone had dismissed such as hypochondria. And in this hypothetical scenario, Person 2's view was unpopular.

Was this because:

A. Person 2 has a controversial opinion, which is too brilliant for the sheeple to understand.

B. Person 2 was being a dick.