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 -
106 comments
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 -
25 comments
Can we add a flag for trolling? Or is this covered under one of the existing flags?
posted by msalt
on May 22, 2008 -
163 comments
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 -
204 comments
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 -
80 comments
Is
this 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 -
43 comments
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 -
144 comments
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 -
198 comments
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 -
351 comments
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 -
45 comments
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 -
52 comments
"And that clot is blocking your wife's cervix."
First, 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 -
149 comments
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 really warranted?
posted by koeselitz
on May 2, 2005 -
36 comments
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 -
59 comments
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 -
92 comments
Could we get a "troll" option for flagging?
posted by norm
on Mar 7, 2005 -
30 comments
"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 -
78 comments
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 -
124 comments
"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 -
149 comments
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 -
24 comments
