Am I A Troll?

[DUMPSTER]

My dear poster friend Steven aka Ijustwannateach constantly calls me a Troll. I don’t know why. People post and I just reply as I see life through my eyes, which I know is different from a lot of you reading this. You see that’s what I thought forums were for. Sometimes you agree and sometimes you disagree. I’ve actually said on a few occasions that I agree with something Steven has said and other times I’ve disagreed with his thinking. Now this is when the troll accusations get thrown.

Now I know some people can’t take criticism and I believe Steven maybe suffering from this and maybe an ego problem now that he has passed 2000 posts.

I think my posts are valid enough but I get called a troll when I'm not massaging his ego.

He's obviously not been equipped mentally to cope with exposing his life story in the manner he has chosen. I have already said some private therapy sessions would have been more appropriate. He is too fragile at this time and he is carrying a lot of anger from his relationship with O and he keeps taking it out on those who point out his fallible nature.

I’ll say it again to all the posters, I am not attacking Steven.

You are a good person under all that baggage you carry. Life indeed must be a burden to you and slowly but surely you can overcome this trauma in your life.

"O" saw something in you. We all see something in you. If only you could see then your misery would end.

So I am curious to know those who think I am indeed a troll because I for one believe there is a difference between disagreeing with someone and being a troll.

[britmaveric]

Troll like post I'm afraid, bound to get grief on this one.

[The_Moog]

I started out with being recipient of those ho-hum accusations of trollery and homophobia on this Forum, which incidentally is the best Sub Forum on Thaivisa by a distance.

Yet now, I am universally accepted as a 'Gay Icon'.

(Like what George Clooney or Robbie Williams is)

There will actually be a small group going to Farose in about a month, dressed in Sou Westers, gumboots and moby-dick oilskins. All are welcome to attend.

Edited December 28, 2005 by The_Moog

[Totster]

.... when I'm not massaging his ego.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is this a code for something... had a tiff ...?

oops... am I a troll

totster

[DUMPSTER]

Well Moog coming from a gay Icon, I both respect and appreciate your words of wisdom.

Edited December 28, 2005 by DUMPSTER

[Guest endure]

I started out with being recipient of those ho-hum accusations of trollery and homophobia on this Forum, which incidentally is the best Sub Forum on Thaivisa by a distance.

Yet now, I am universally accepted as a 'Gay Icon'.

(Like what George Clooney or Robbie Williams is)

There will actually be a small group going to Farose in about a month, dressed in Sou Westers, gumboots and moby-dick oilskins. All are welcome to attend.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Who's this moby guy, Moog? Is he a shag?

[BambinA]

if u ask like"am i a troll?" mean u know what it is..and i dont think people who realize it is a troll (i might wrong)

me,myself.. im sometime a kosher, sometime a troll

[meom]

If the OP were a lesbian I could give it to you straight

[Ijustwannateach]

I started out with being recipient of those ho-hum accusations of trollery and homophobia on this Forum, which incidentally is the best Sub Forum on Thaivisa by a distance.

You *are* occasionally both slightly trollish and slightly homophobic, Moog, but I think it's all a put-on, anyway, and 90% of the time entertaining.

Yet now, I am universally accepted as a 'Gay Icon'.

(Like what George Clooney or Robbie Williams is)

There will actually be a small group going to Farose in about a month, dressed in Sou Westers, gumboots and moby-dick oilskins. All are welcome to attend.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Heh heh heh... yes, I also accept that you're now a gay icon... and my secret love....

[DUMPSTER]

Well, when I first heard the word "Troll" I wondered what I was actually being called. My mum had this ugly long haired doll when I was young and she said it was a Troll. So I assumed that's was what I was initially being called but then I thought surely It couldn't be that.

So what is the true definition of a "forum troll"?

[BambinA]

So what is the true definition of a "forum troll"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who posts inflammatory messages on the Internet, such as on online discussion forums, to disrupt discussion or to upset its participants. "Troll" can also mean the inflammatory message itself posted by a troll or be a verb meaning to post such messages. "Trolling" (the gerund) is also commonly used to describe the activity

read more here >> wikipedia -internet troll

[DUMPSTER]

the line read.. give it to me straight (if anyone here can actually manage that)

But I had to cut it because it was too long to post.

Of course it was meant to be light hearted but of it seems we are not allowed to use the word straight when talking about a gay troll.

[DUMPSTER]

Thanks for the definition BambinA.

I'm certainly not one of those trolls. Steven how could you call me such names?

[toptuan]

So what is the true definition of a "forum troll"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...to upset its participants...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Aye, there's the rub, Matey!

In a forum where controversy is part of the norm (e.g. "Gay People in Thailand"), someone's going to get their feathers ruffled. It's a given.

To use the illogical defense of "poisoning the well" (i.e. troll-labeling) is bound to follow. Another given.

I guess you just gotta boost those posts up into the thousands to get some credibility. Dumpster, I think you have posted some very thoughtful insights in this forum, and it disturbs me that this simpletononian type of response still gets utilized.

[falux]

How do gays make money? They spend their whole time talking (and asking) nonsense.

[toptuan]

How do gays make money? They spend their whole time talking (and asking) nonsense.

Ah...the inflammatory one-line zinger!* Now THERE's a troll.

Take note, name-callers.

*Which this poster is famous for, I notice. Spends most of his time in other forums, but then pops over here to take a quick SH*T and splits. I would hardly include Dumpster in the same category with this sort of drivel.

Edited January 1, 2006 by toptuan

[markuk]

I always thought that trolls came from fairytales - the main one i remember as

Three Billy Goats Gruff is a famous fairy tale of Scandinavian origin, in which three goats cross a bridge, under which is a fearsome troll who tries to prevent them from crossing it. The Three Billy Goats Gruff is an 'eat-me-when-I'm-fatter' tale

Maybe there is un undercover message in your question??

[Scott]

I vote not a troll! For what it's worth.

Happy New Year.

[DUMPSTER]

Thanks for the kind words scott and toptuan.

All I've tried to do is give a view of the world through my gay eyes which may or may not be different from others. We all have different experiences to pass on and share and I for one enjoy reading how people see life through their eyes. It’s not about converting people to your way of thinking, just to show that maybe there is another option or path to choose. I’m always open for a heated debate or light banter but believe that just because your point of view is either not understood or reciprocated there is no need to name call or incite which a few members are very good at doing especially for newbies. Just give them the benefit of the doubt and if they are a troll they will show their true colors eventually. If they have a different take on life then give them respect and understand that this is how they see the world at this time.

Happy posting in 2006

[bronze]

You are NOT a troll in my opinion.

[Jersey_UK]

You are NOT a troll in my opinion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have not been on this forum long, but from what I see so far on a lot of the sections anybody who seems to have a different opinion to the accepted "norm" (or any opinion) is called a "troll" - which then leads to a couple of dozen posts where people show that they have no sense of humour or much understanding of the English language, even if they can read and write it.

Kinda infantile and dull really. But each to their own.

F#ck me, you've got me at it now

[ProThaiExpat]

Dumpster: Civility in posting is always in issue. Many post most impolite comments which attack other posters personally, not a means of engendering good will.

It is indeed a very different thing between attacking a proposition under discussion and attacking the proponent of the proposition personally. No one likes to be attacked personally. If you or IJWT look back through your posts, you will be able to identify who started it by attacking the other personally first.

Unfortunatley, many post carelessly and attack personally, but unintentionally. I try very hard not to, but when I have done it and it is pointed out to me with a stinging return personal attack, I apologise and point out where in my post I went wrong.

I have posted before how I disagree with your absolutist views and to the extent that that post was considered a personal attack, I shouldn't have said it. Far better to phrase that thought as "Those who hold absolutist views" and alow the poster to "put on the shoe if it fits". So apologies are extended, as I do have a sense I stepped over the line in this regard, but not so much that I am willing to go back and research the actual post.

I doubt one can be a troll without a personal attack or a inflamatory attack on a religion, faith or race contained in a post. Merely posting ones own belief with a clear identification that it is ones personal belief, seems non-trollish. Such as:

"I believe all homosexuals are perverts and deviant in their sexual practices as does the Pope". While posting this statement in a Gay Forum without any substantive additional comment may be considered inflamatory by many, by including the Pope in the statement, it takes it out of the troll category in my view.

It would certainly be more interesting as a post if the poster went on to say why he thought that way and allow responsible replies pointing out the errors in his proposition. I am sure replies to such a post would contain personal attacks from militant gays, but I would hope not, as if one is to persuade, one should not offend.

[toptuan]

Separating the person from the issue.

Separating the messenger from the message.

Small minds just can't do it, and greater minds fall prey to it from time to time as well.

I've bowed out of other threads and stopped sharing my views there simply because the participants could not sort out the personalities from the discussion. It's discouraging. I'm sure many of you have done the same.

We probably won't win this never-ending battle in this forum, but I personally appreciate the effort of everyone trying. It lends a certain civility to the discussion which encourages all to honestly and enthusiastically share their thoughts. I believe that's all Dumpster asked for by starting this thread.

My two cents.

Edited January 3, 2006 by toptuan

[DUMPSTER]

toptuan you just hit the nail on the head.

[nephron]

I doubt one can be a troll without a personal attack or a inflamatory attack on a religion, faith or race contained in a post.  Merely posting ones own belief with a  clear identification that it is ones personal belief, seems non-trollish. Such as:

"I believe all homosexuals are perverts and deviant in their sexual practices as does the Pope".  While posting this statement in a Gay Forum without any substantive additional comment may be considered inflamatory by many, by including the Pope in the statement, it takes it out of the troll category in my view.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, I believe that comment is extremely trollish, if not placed in a discussion about, say "gays and morality" or "debate gay sex" or whatever. It is highly unlikely to be just someone who wants people to know their beliefs- much more likely an immature giggling sod who wants to provoke a violent and fiery reaction (see: "flame war, to flame")

[Ijustwannateach]

^Indeed- although the manner of stating such an opinion can render it less trollish.

When reading the forum, if you click on the underlined username/handle in the upper-left corner of each message, you will go to the profile screen for that username. One of the options then is "Find (or view) All Posts" by that user. It will bring up a individualised "thread" consisting of all posts by that user, chronologically backwards from the most recent to the first, on several pages if necessary. I highly recommend this valuable tool as a means of gaining perspective on any poster's general patterns of behavior on the forum.

"Steven"

[nephron]

^Indeed- although the manner of stating such an opinion can render it less trollish.

When reading the forum, if you click on the underlined username/handle in the upper-left corner of each message, you will go to the profile screen for that username.  One of the options then is "Find (or view) All Posts" by that user.  It will bring up a individualised "thread" consisting of all posts by that user, chronologically backwards from the most recent to the first, on several pages if necessary.  I highly recommend this valuable tool as a means of gaining perspective on any poster's general patterns of behavior on the forum.

"Steven"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Context is important, yes. But someone would have to be fairly socially unaware to not know that coming to this board and stating "I think that gay people are disgusting and perverted and the Pope agrees with me" would be extremely inflammatory.

[PeaceBlondie]

If we're not having a discussion about the morality of Homosexuality and the Pope's opinion, the cited theoretical post would be inflammatory and I think I'd delete it, unless the sentence were also part of a longer, rational-sounding explanation. I'm having a similar discussion on another forum.

I like the comments, above from several posters, that we need to separate the message from the messenger and stop the 'ad hominem' personal attacks. To me, the attacks are a sign that the person already lost the argument and is just dissing the other guy.

Happy New Year, etc. It's fun to be back in Chiang Mai for a few days.

[Guest endure]

If we're not having a discussion about the morality of Homosexuality and the Pope's opinion, the cited theoretical post would be inflammatory and I think I'd delete it, unless the sentence were also part of a longer, rational-sounding explanation.  I'm having a similar discussion on another forum.

When you delete a post do you leave notice in its place that you've deleted it or does it just disappear?

[PeaceBlondie]

It may just disappear. The person who posted it should, ideally, get an explanation why it was deleted. On one recent thread, though, (maybe the one about billygoats and shin-hairs), there were enough animal-related posts that I hardly mentioned it, except maybe at the current end of the thread to say the animals had left the building.

Sometimes, the purpose of deleting one or more offensive posts is because they were all related and off topic, or they were simply defamatory or in such poor taste, that I'm guessing it's better to disappear them without drawing attention to the offense.

Fair enough? Perhaps you're concerned that you'll make a post without realizing it's bad (even sober ) and wonder why it disappeared. That happened to me, replying to a topic that's taboo, and my post also went away without knowing why. But I figured out later that it was taboo (please don't ask).