Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[fqllve]

Yes. Trolling is a useful term, but overuse and misuse has greatly diminished this usefulness. Nobody wants trolls on a serious forum, for example, so the rules include "no trolling". However, this invites anyone who is angered by someone to report that someone as a troll; and, as shown in the article, this is a perfectly valid accusation under the current perception of the term "troll". This topic exists for the same reason dictionaries do.

That's what happens to words though, once they become popular people start using them for all kinds of things they didn't really apply to and no one can really figure out what they mean anymore. Hell, I've had people tell me that trolling is not flame-baiting but using a specific kind of illogical argument. I didn't quite understand what he was getting at though, and strongly suspected he was trolling me.

[Lectorog]

He could perhaps be referring to "troll science", which is a type of logic that was inspired by trolls. The use of troll science is no longer trolling, according to the rules of use described here, because it's something that has become well-known on the Internet, hindering originality. People now speak of troll science for amusement by logical loopholes rather than pretending to believe a stance that is obviously wrong but difficult to explain away.

"Lulz" was a corruption of the phrase "Lol" prevalent during /b/'s (The random board on 4chan.) glory days. It's rarely used nowadays, usually someone who uses it is just getting acquainted with the whole trolling subculture on the internet. Lulz was first a way to say lol in a plural form, but evolved into a phrase that described entertaining content.

So you were saying here

Also, literally no one trolls included use "Lulz" anymore.

that no trolls use the term "Lulz" anymore?

[Neonivek]

I think what happened was a migration of terms

A Troll was someone who attempts to annoy.

However over time a troll became someone who does something "annoying" thus a troll became an "annoying person" thus weakening the term.

[Loud Whispers]

I'd like a example of actual, real trolling, in this case, since I'm now unclear on what actually constitutes trolling, only what it isn't.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[Nadaka]

Oh man. I remember on the old Wizards of the Coast board, there was this one troll who would answer every rules related question in a plausible but factually incorrect way. It got my goat.

I can't remember his username anymore.

[MagmaMcFry]

Here's some reference material:

An article about a "professional troll"
A comment I found
Don't read the other comments. Seriously.

[Leafsnail]

Oh ok, I'll be sure to call you a bad poster from now on instead

[Scoops Novel]

More information on hackers if you would. As for anonymous, what exactly is their states and ideals now?

[GlyphGryph]

I think what happened was a migration of terms
A Troll was someone who attempts to annoy.
However over time a troll became someone who does something "annoying" thus a troll became an "annoying person" thus weakening the term.

This has never been the definition of an internet troll.

A troll is someone who intentionally trolls for emotive outbursts or some specific reaction or result, i.e. "fishes" (trolling is a type of fishing) by laying out bait and leading people to have the desired response. Not all trolls troll for anger - there are support trolls, and honestly they are some of the fucking scum of the earth, far worse than the anger trolls in all too many circumstances. Also, the common concern troll. The term trolling simply refers to the act of baiting responses (with the primary purpose being the response and the results, and the content taking a secondary priority if it exists as a priority at all).

And a large portion of internet users engage in trolling now and again, but are not, overall, trolls, since it isn't their defining pattern of behaviour.

I think the OP was mostly a waste of space, though - if you want to complain about people posting a tl;dr, knowing in advance that it is likely to be a normal response should indicate to you that you are maybe doing something wrong. I did read all of it and gained... well, nothing.

I honestly shouldn't have. It was kind of a colossal waste of time, since it was a point by point refutation to a site I ALSO gained nothing from reading.

I guess I should have known that in advance from the Rant label, though.

[Loud Whispers]

A troll is someone who intentionally trolls

Hory shet

[Scoops Novel]

Are we all being meta or just some of us?

[GlyphGryph]

A troll is someone who intentionally trolls

Hory shet

I dunno, that seems like it can safely replace your entire first post without losing any actual information, no?

[kaenneth]

My best chatroom trolling bait, use carefully:

"Star Wars is more realistic than Star Trek." (followed by cherry picked examples)

"[Sega/Sony/XBox] is for little kids, adults prefer Nintendo." (followed by "Only children like violent games, mature people like more relaxing entertainment.")

"Everquest is not bad for a WoW knock-off." (akin to saying 'Dwarf Fortress isn't bad for a Dwarfs! knockoff')

"There just being an grammer nazi." (pretty obvious)

[Loud Whispers]

A troll is someone who intentionally trolls

Hory shet

I dunno, that seems like it can safely replace your entire first post without losing any actual information, no?

You can't define what is or isn't an "Actual way" to troll, as the wanted end result of trolling... Can be achieved in different ways.

This is very topic specific. It has rails, the rails are about the mis-use of trolling as a word.

(trolling is a type of fishing)

[justinlee999]

I think the problem here is that you're reading smosh.

OH BURN!