Posted by alteredtome on 2005-09-12 05:57:09
Post Subject:
Completely edited/deleted after reading "Searching for Safety Online: Managing 'Trolling' in a Feminist Forum", am withholding all comments until I have more experience with this subject and this board. Tried to delete, in fact, but the system won't let me. Article located here.
Posted by brdgt on 2005-09-11 21:52:32
Post Subject: Re: Troll
What makes someone a "troll"? Is it being a conservative, or is it being a conservative who speaks her mind? There are conservative crafters in the world - I'm one of them. And I love Jean's book. She totally inspired me.
So what is so threatening about a Republican who knits?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll:
"In the context of the Internet, a troll is a person who posts inflammatory messages intended to cause a disruption in discourse. The word is also often used to describe such messages."
PLEASE check out this wikipedia entry, it sounds like you are totally misinterpreting what "troll" means.
"Troll" is Internet-specific term and has nothing to do with politics per se. When a message board has been traditionally and predominantly pro-choice, calling someone a "baby killer" would be considered inflammatory.
Another useful article on trolls:
Searching for Safety Online: Managing "Trolling" in a Feminist Forum (a bit more academic)
Posted by alteredtome on 2005-09-13 12:54:29
Post Subject:
Wow, del....I mean, what else can I say, but "Wow"? (Well, you know I've got more to say, I can never keep it short). ;) You captured so perfectly the essence of the whole kit-and-kaboodle, the messiness of it all: trying to be inclusive, without setting ourselves up to fail; the ability to find and maintain our own voices, without beating up others with them; the stuggle to find what is right by looking at all sides, without getting lost in the sides that get taken. Those passages you cited from Audre Lord are perfect. We "don't have patterns for relating across our human differences as equals." And then Jean is right, this is feminism, and here we are, smack dab in the middle of trying to figure out what that means, in real life.
I know it was hypothetical del, but I think that political discussions will be right here in "freestyle", forever, right at the top. Too much happening in the world to shut that stuff out. Personally, I really need you all to talk about these things. I live smack dab in Religious Right Country (Colorado Springs, CO, Home of Focus on the Family, and Dr. James Dobson), and so for me, this is my place to stretch my liberal bones a bit, and bone up on my facts (semi-pun intended). I've been here for 4 months, which I know isn't a huge amount of time, yet I feel I know your voices, and can trust that things discussed here will bring up things I never even thought about (I had a name change, y'all can check out my blog if you're just dying to know why ;) ).
So, personally, I think with the knowledge that we have all gained from what trolling really is (per the guidelines I'm quoting from you, below), these definitions could perhaps be our guide, part of our own "Roberta's Rules of Order", or something:
1) messages from a sender who appears outwardly sincere,
2) messages designed to attract predictable responses or flames,
3) messages that waste a group's time by provoking futile argument.
(For the brilliant article that outlined these, originally posted by the equally brilliant brgt in this thread, please see Searching for Safety Online: Managing "Trolling" in a Feminist Forum)
And really, what I think it's going to take, in the future, is our own abilities to be concise without getting insulting. Basically, as the woman said, "R-E-S-P-E-C-T". Amen, Aretha.
Del, I felt that you completely opened up your heart here for all of us to see, and that brings tears to my eyes, too. That takes a certain amount of trust in the people here, and a hell of a lot of ovaries. I think you're my new hero. ;) I hope you don't mind, because I am going to copy what you wrote, as a reminder to myself, to "Be the change that I wish to see in the world."
Posted by brdgt on 2006-04-29 17:07:57
Post Subject: What is Trolling
The purpose of this thread is to establish some terminology and familiarity with internet "trolls."
If you are lucky, you may not have encountered trolls before, so hopefully this will help you out. Maybe someone has called you a troll and you wonder why? Hopefully this will help you understand why or why not your actions could be construed as "trolling." Maybe a thread makes you uncomfortable and you can't put your finger on it, hopefully this thread will help.
Feel free to add, expand, discuss, share experiences, etc. - this is just a basis for discussion, not a rule. While this includes a definition, this is not about defining "trolling" but to explore what behavior can be seen as "trolling" and what to do about it.
Wikipedia has a great entry on Internet Trolling, here are some key points relevant to our board:
Definition:
In Internet terminology, a troll is someone who comes into an established community such as an online discussion forum, and posts inflammatory, rude or offensive messages designed to annoy and antagonize the existing members or disrupt the flow of discussion.
On Labelling/Being Labelled a Troll:
The term troll is highly subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. The term is often used to discredit an opposing position, or its proponent, by argument ad hominem. When appropriately applied to purposefully disruptive online behavior, the word troll economically converts an abstract code of online manners into a concrete image.
Often, calling someone a troll makes assumptions about a writer's motives that may be incorrect. Regardless of the writer's motives, controversial posts are likely to attract a corrective or patronizing or outraged response by those who do not distinguish between real physical community (where people are actually exposed to some shared risk of bodily harm by their actions), and epistemic community (based on a mere exchange of words and ideas). Customs of discourse, or etiquette, originating in physical communities are often applied naively to online discourse by newcomers who are not used to the range of views expressed online, often anonymously. Hence, both users and posts are commonly, and sometimes inaccurately, labelled as trolls when their content upsets people — ironically, the accusatory labeling of a troll may be more disruptive than the original alleged offense itself. Also, people may be more inclined to use epithets like troll in online public discussion than they would be in person, because online forums may seem more impersonal.
"Feeding the Troll":
"...Experienced participants in online forums know that the most effective way to discourage a troll is usually to ignore him or her, because responding encourages a true troll to continue disruptive posts to that forum — hence the often-seen warning "Please do not feed the troll", for which PDNFTT is a common initialism. Posting this warning publicly, in reply to a troll's behavior to discourage further replies, may discourage the troll. However, it can also have the reverse effect, becoming itself food for the troll. Therefore, when a forum participant sees an apparently innocent answer to a troll as potential troll food, it may be more prudent to deliver the "Please do not feed the troll" warning in a private message to the answerer.
Examples:
One-shot trolls
One-shot troll messages are intended to be disruptive, and tend to be very obvious to ensure that they will receive annoyed replies.
Disruptive trolls
Off topic messages: Those that are irrelevant to the focus of the forum. This can also be done in the middle of an existing thread to attempt to hijack the thread, or otherwise change the topic at hand. Off topic messages usually occur when a member has been completely disproved in a serious debate thus, causing that member to use his or her other multiple pseudonyms for the purposes of changing the subject matter. These disruptions may result in the degeneration of a well informed thread into a heated juvenile exchange consisting of insults and childish accusations between multiple parties.
Inflammatory messages, including racist, sexist, classist or otherwise needlessly hateful comments.
Opinionated statements: Posting messages expressing their own opinions as generally accepted facts without offering any proof or analysis.
Spoiling: Deliberately revealing the ending or an important part of movie, book, game etc.
Bumping an old discussion, or rehashing a highly controversial past topic, particularly in smaller online communities.
Deliberate and repeated misspelling of other people's nicks in order to disturb or irritate them in a conversation.
Attention-seeking trolls:
This class of trolls seeks to incite as many responses as possible and to absorb a disproportionate share of the collective attention span.
Advertising another forum, especially a rival or a hated forum.
Claiming to be someone they cannot possibly be: "As an actual, real-life samurai, I have some problems with (the film) The Seven Samurai."
No longer having affiliation to or current knowledge of the subject at hand, yet continually posting opinions and commentary as "experts".
Messages containing a deliberate flaw or error: "I think 2001: A Space Odyssey is Roman Polanski's best film."
Asking for help with an implausible task or problem: "How do I season my Crock Pot? I don't want everything I cook in it to taste the same."
Intentionally naive questions: "Can I cook pasta in Evian instead of water?"
Intentional typos: "Does anyone have a copy of Super Maria Bras. for the Nintendo?"
Messages containing a self-referential appeal to status. "Pepsi is for white trash. I prefer a real soft drink like Coke."
Intentionally posting an outrageous argument, deliberately constructed around a fundamental but obfuscated flaw or error. Often the poster will become defensive when the argument is refuted, and may continue the thread through the use of further flawed arguments; this is referred to as "feeding" the troll.
Politically contentious messages: "Everyone knows that all Republicans/Democrats are evil."
Posting politically sensitive images in inappropriate places.
Feigning innocence, after a flamewar ensues.
Off-topic complaints about personal life, even threats of suicide: sometimes, this is the "cry for help" troll. In other instances, this type of trolling may be for amusement. If the motive is amusement, the troll may post ridiculous comments seemingly out of the blue. "I want to marry a hyena."
Plural or paranoid answers to personal opinions expressed by individuals: "I don't think that all of you really believe that -— you're just ganging up on me!"
A WONDERFUL article that is very relevant to GetCrafty is Searching for Safety Online: Managing "Trolling" in a Feminist Forum
Abstract:
A common phenomenon in online discussion groups is the individual who baits and provokes other group members, often with the result of drawing them into fruitless argument and diverting attention from the stated purposes of the group. This study documents a case in which the members of a vulnerable online community—a feminist web-based discussion forum—are targeted by a “troller” attempting to disrupt their discussion space. We analyze the strategies that make the troller successful and the targeted group largely ineffectual in responding to his attack, as a means to understand how such behavior might be minimized and managed in general. The analysis further suggests that feminist and other non-mainstream online forums are especially vulnerable, in that they must balance inclusive ideals against the need for protection and safety, a tension that can be exploited by disruptive elements to generate intragroup conflict.
Conclusions:
We conclude by suggesting several pro-active interventions that might help to forestall a vulnerable group from being harassed, yet not squelch debate. The first is to educate users about trolling. Trollers particularly prey on inexperienced Internet users, including populations that are often vulnerable for other reasons. Forum administrators might warn users about the patterns that trollers follow. Simply naming the danger would heighten people's awareness of it. Because the danger is emotional and not physical, we can imagine that warning about trolling might be similar to warning about phone pranks or sales scams, where awareness of the modus operandi is often sufficient to forestall the effect of the advantage-taking event.
Perhaps while we are educating users, we might also inform them of the lack of anonymity of Internet communication, no matter how safe and secure a discussion site may appear. Users need to be aware of the practice of archiving Internet transcripts, of how easily messages can be disseminated to other Internet venues, and of the fact that at least one systems administrator always has access privileges to the contents of their servers, even when messages have been deleted. Greater awareness might lead users to reflect before responding hastily
to provocative messages, since such messages could potentially come back to haunt them later.
This case also points to the need for online forums to articulate policies, guidelines for appropriate participation, and penalties for violating those guidelines, in advance of harassment episodes taking place. Public online spaces are likely to experience disruption from trolling and flaming unless policies and capabilities are implemented for excluding problem users. It is necessary in this regard to distinguish clearly between cooperative debate (however heated) and uncooperative provocation (however masked). Unambiguous and strong moderation from the start can avoid many problems. Some evidence suggests that groups vulnerable to harassment and trolling benefit especially from stricter centralized moderation.....
