At this point, the Westboro Baptist Church seems to show up and do something offensive, in a play for media attention, every time someone dies heroically or tragically. Do we need to help them? This church has, like 40 members, and it is not actually news that they show up to picket funerals again and again and a-freaking-gain. I didn't flag the comment about it in the Yarnell thread
because it's not, strictly speaking, off-topic. But I think it would be a better world if, when these guys show up, hoping to get yelled about on the Internet, we fail to oblige.
posted by escabeche
on Jul 2, 2013 -
So the Amanda Knox
thread has been pretty successfully trolled in the exact same way twice now, the first time apparently by a user operating under a secondary account. So, hey, are nerkul and fraac the same people? and could they knock it off?
posted by Artw
on Oct 5, 2011 -
I think it was here that I came across a great webpage listing forum trolling techniques that read like an academic listing of informal logic fallacies. It had things like finding errors in small and irrelevant details, ad-hominem attacks, using provocative and loaded terms, shifting claims, concern trolling etc... I've looked for it several times recently and can't find it. Anybody remember the link?
posted by srboisvert
on Aug 2, 2009 -
Can we add a flag for trolling? Or is this covered under one of the existing flags?
posted by msalt
on May 22, 2008 -
Could we perhaps gently show Gnostic Novelist where the door is? I would link to some of the more egregious of his baby-smearing-doodoo-all-over-threads, but it's probably simpler just to look at his posting history
posted by dirtynumbangelboy
on Aug 26, 2007 -
I think the moderators should please actually READ the question
before deleting it. I asked a valid question about dinner table conversation, and the moderator deletes it on reading the word "troll". I cry unfair!
posted by markovich
on Jul 5, 2007 -
in any way acceptable? By which I mean posting a question that you "know" will be flame-bait, and then taunting those who answer?
posted by CKmtl
on Mar 12, 2007 -
There seems to be a contingent of people on this website (we all know who they are) who feel the need to pollute threads that would be otherwise relevant, reasonable, and/or interesting. They come in, spew their opinion, and then proceed to turn thought-provoking material into a three ring circus. After having to sift through heaps of vitrol to find comments that even remotely relate to the topic at hand twice today, I've had enough. Your need to have your last word in a public meeting space that prides itself on civil, topical conversation is disgustingly revealing of your immaturity and arrogance. As a user of this site who is primarily a lurker, I want to make a statement on behalf of those people who come here for the fascinating content: If you feel the need to troll and argue, shut up already.
posted by potch
on Jan 2, 2006 -
Is it possible to engage in a debate with a Conservative on MeFi without calling him a troll? I give you this example
posted by mkultra
on Dec 16, 2005 -
Who's "trolling" now?
Don't we have enough vituperative political "debates" around here without somebody singling out and baiting certain individuals by name?
posted by davy
on Sep 20, 2005 -
Dios is blatantly trolling.
Again. This time, there can be no doubt in my mind that he is simply posting ridiculous, inflammatory and disingenuous comments for the purpose of starting needless arguments. If he had bothered to read the post, he would know that his point is invalidated completely. Do we have to tolerate his constant shitting on any political thread?
posted by [expletive deleted]
on Aug 31, 2005 -
This is the thread for any complainers about the Mary Cary thread and the trolls that ran about it.
/ not complaining, just preventing snarks on the MeTa page. Metafilter is rated G well for the most part. *shakes fist at Mary Cary*
posted by wheelieman
on Jun 15, 2005 -
"And that clot is blocking your wife's cervix."
, bait emotionally susceptible people with some easy trollery. Second
, after you've drawn out some victims, call them "shallow hags" and tell them to "take [their] self-absorbed neuroses to an appropriate forum." Third
, deliver the knockout blow: attack them with their own medical conditions!
All in a day's work for Mayor Curley: defeating infertile, shallow internet hags everywhere.
posted by Mid
on May 13, 2005 -
I grant that my first comment
in this thread
was a little troll-ish, and I'm sorry about that. I probably contributed a pretty bad atmosphere to the discussion there. But was this
posted by koeselitz
on May 2, 2005 -
Excuse me ignorance for a few moments, but I in all honesty cannot for the life of me understand why bevets
is being considered a troll/flamer in this thread about evolution
Now, I am a full proponent of the Theory of Evolution. However, that said, all bevets is doing is disagreeing
with the Theory. Some people like orthogonality
decide to actually respond to bevets' ideas
. Not to pick on any one user, but then you get bshort
who sounds more like a troll than bevets by not even thoughtfully
responding to bevets' creationist ideas.
In all honestly, if byver wants to have an open dialogue about this topic, what is the problem? Does that make him a troll if he earnestly wants to discuss the topic, even if you all think he sucks at it because if so, then a whole LOT of users would be trolls with whom the masses just happen to agree with.
*note* I do NOT intend this thread to be a pileon over bevets (enough of that happened in the thread), but rather what makes a troll vs. a good poster since all I see here is a very strong disagreement in ideologies.
posted by jmd82
on Mar 26, 2005 -
I disagree with the decision to close this MeTa thread.
I understand that you made a decision regarding the topic, and I understand that it could have
devolved into name-calling, but as it stood, the comments were reasonable and without personal insults. A better discussion could have ensued regarding flagging etiquette and how to deal with obnoxious comments; in fact, the makings of a good conversation regarding what constitutes a flaggable offense existed. I just felt that the closing was premature.
posted by BlueTrain
on Mar 7, 2005 -
Could we get a "troll" option for flagging?
posted by norm
on Mar 7, 2005 -
"Troll" may have a respectable lineage on the Web but, frankly, for some of us who joined later in the day, it seems like a quaint, medieval way of classifying anyone who's the least bit provocative, thought-provoking or even unorthodox. Recently, any forceful, strongly-worded attempt to spark discussion with a non-mainstream viewpoint, generally from the Left, has been lamely denounced as a "troll". Could it be time to give the ye olde troll
accusation a well-deserved rest? I hope so. The English language is one of the richest in the world and troll
sounds parochial, pimply, nerdish, cliquey, incestuous and, ultimately, meaningless.
posted by MiguelCardoso
on Aug 30, 2004 -
Ok, I wasn't going to say anything when Witty decided to spend an inordinate amount of time trying to ruin amberglow's thread
with his particular (read: vapid, boring) brand of insane troll logic. However, he then decided an interesting course of action would be to make a similarly unwarranted (perhaps even moreso) comment
in an unrelated thread.
Therefore, I politely and humbly request that Witty please refrain from making similarily irrelevant--and snide--comments in the future, at least in in the blue.
posted by The God Complex
on Jun 14, 2004 -
"As for the purpose of this post, I guess I wanted to see if you loud-mouthed, violently prejudiced morons on Mefi had it left in you to try and rationally adress a troubling issue that doesn't jive with your incredibly narrow viewpoints."
Thank you sir may I have another
posted by scarabic
on Mar 26, 2004 -
We've all seen what can happen when MeFi devolves into pointless personality conflicts: the site gets hijacked to propogate something that 99.9% of the users don't care about. We've also all seen one member virtually drag another into such conflicts, making a two-way crapfest out of what was originally just one-sided goofiness...[more inside]
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly
on Oct 7, 2003 -