Difference between revisions of "Discussion trolling"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(→‎About: moved goals of rational discourse to a separate page)
(→‎Related: the "Gord Birch" technique)
Line 31: Line 31:
 
* Trolling is an expression of [[intellectual dishonesty]].
 
* Trolling is an expression of [[intellectual dishonesty]].
 
* Trolling typically makes use of [[rhetorical manipulation]].
 
* Trolling typically makes use of [[rhetorical manipulation]].
* Trolling techniques include: [[throwing acorns]]
+
* Trolling techniques include:
 +
** [[throwing acorns]]
 +
** alternately accuse opponent of perpetuating a disagreement, and then make inflammatory accusations so that they keep responding (thus proving your point)
  
 
==Links==
 
==Links==

Revision as of 21:18, 7 February 2013

About

Discussion trolling (or just "trolling") is the act of disrupting a conversation with irrelevant or inflammatory comments in an attempt to provoke an emotional overreaction from, and/or waste the time and energy of, opposing parties, as opposed to working honestly towards the goals of rational discourse.

The word "troll", in this context, may also refer to:

  • a comment made with the intention of trolling
  • a person who engages in trolling

Discussion trolling is most commonly found in text-based discussions on the internet, typically in the reader comments on a blog post, where others in the conversation cannot easily use out-of-band communication (e.g. facial expressions, body language, instant messaging) to reach a consensus as to whether or not trolling has occurred or take action to exclude the troll from the conversation.

(This is one reason why some form of moderation is generally necessary in order to maintain civility in text-based discussions involving a large enough group of participants.)

Varieties

Purpose

While some trolls may be in it just for the fun of causing a disruption (the internet equivalent of kicking over an anthill and then retreating to a safe distance), some trolls may be methodically attempting to prevent productive conversations on certain topics -- either because of a personal preference, or because they are being materially compensated for doing so.

More study is needed, as there have not yet been any proven cases of this sort of trolling. There certainly have been cases where people were paid to express certain opinions in open discussion areas, so paid trolls would seem a logical next step. They would be harder to detect, and might be able to get certain topics declared "off-limits" due to their "inflammatory" nature -- when in fact it is the troll who has been doing most of the inflaming.

Examples

  • http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/12/kwanzaa_cake_maker_confesses.php: comment #2 is obviously a concern troll, though difficult to refute without knowledge of how genuine low-budget meals should be prepared; comment #9 does a very nice take-down, as does comment #18 (from a somewhat different angle). Fortunately, nobody seems to take the troll too seriously.
  • The Further Left You Are the Less You Know About Economics: "CharlieK" posts a long, rambling argument which is quickly demolished by "Pro Street", who also identifies the post as a troll. "CharlieK" deliberately and clearly distorts "Pro Street"'s rebuttal, which "Pro Street" points out -- but "CharlieK" is allowed to continue his pointless arguing because there is no social mechanism by which other readers can collectively agree that he is being a nuisance.

Related

Links

Reference