Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
"Trolls": A Ridiculous Liberal Myth

By qpt in Op-Ed
Thu May 31, 2001 at 12:41:41 PM EST
Tags: Kuro5hin.org (all tags)
Kuro5hin.org

An outside observer, on noticing the recent flurry of meta articles, might easily come to the conclusion that Kuro5hin.org is facing a crisis. To that extent, the observer would be correct. However, the nature of this crisis has been systematically misrepresented at every turn. Worse, the proposed fixes would in fact exacerbate the true cause of Kuro5hin's ills.

To be blunt, the Kuro5hin community is being consumed with paranoia and hysteria in response to a threat that does not even exist. While no doubt many people's belief in trolls is well-meaning, it is most definitely badly informed. Over the course of this article, the myth of the existence of trolls will be systematically debunked. Finally, some clues to the origin of the myth will be examined, most pointing to post-modern liberal ideologies.


It has been said that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and such evidence will be provided. However, it is important to first realize the difficulty inherent to any argument for a negative proposition. In truth, any belief in trolls is ultimately unfalsifiable, and as such cannot be disproved. However, the goal here is to rightfully oust that belief from the realm of shared objectivity. If one wishes to believe in trolls, such is one's right. However, that belief must be constructed as a personal claim of faith, not as a statement of objective fact.

First, it will be helpful to specify the exact nature of the imagined crises. If the worst panic-mongers are to be believed, Kuro5hin.org is currently being besieged by a vast army of posters who post solely for the purpose of causing controversy. To objectively examine this claim, it is necessary to ask what, who, and why.

What is the nature of this attack? If the claim of a troll invasion is to based in fact, one should be able to find ample evidence of inflammatory, worthless posts. However, the posts simply do not exist. Certainly much of which is written in Kuro5hin.org may offend various individuals to differing degrees, but there is not a large group of comments that express no tenable opinion and only inflame and cause offense.

Who is the source of this attack? This is also difficult to determine. In the course of researching this article, I visited many alleged troll meeting places, including "secret sids" on Slashdot.org, Geekizoid.com, and the channel #trolls on slashnet. Without exception, I found these places to be inhabited either by extremely juvenile posters engaging in puerile antics or bored individuals simply discussing everyday topics. The trolls of myth were nowhere to be seen.

While some posters no doubt use more aggressive language than others. On the whole, most members of the Kuro5hin.org community present a coherent and consistent world view. Admittedly, some individuals appear to have a particular issue about which they routinely squabble, but this is to be expected in any group as diverse as Kuro5hin.org's user base. Importantly, there plainly is not a army of people routinely posting contradictory and provocative material.

Finally, why would anyone engage in the alleged behavior? Why would anyone expend the necessary time and effort to write contradictory nonsense for the sole purpose of arousing tempers? The proposition is patently absurd. The passion of the intellect demands that one remains true to one's deepest convictions. To violate these passions would be an odious task to anyone. It is ridiculous to suppose that many would voluntarily engage in such behavior.

It is obvious, then, that the myth of trolls has little basis in truth. However, the question of its origin remains. Although this is impossible to determine with absolute certainty, the most probable explanation lies in post-modern liberal philosophy. One of the overriding themes in post-modern western thought is the individualized relativity of truth. However, because of inherent intellectual passions, disagreements are impossible to avoid. This presents a paradox. One wishes very much to argue against another, but if truth is individualized, there are no grounds on which to do so.

When truth is relative, the only criticism is insincerity. The only remaining means of disapproval is claims that one's opponent does not actually think what he is professing, and upon honest reflection would recant. The troll hysteria represents an extreme instance of this attitude. Faced with opinions that are utterly irreconcilable with their own, many of Kuro5hin.org's members resort to accusations of trickery and insincerity.

Although crying "troll" perhaps provides more immediate gratification, the long-term health of Kuro5hin.org demands that we as a community learn to accept the differences of opinion that our diverse membership holds. For the sake of peaceful intellectual discourse, it is time to retire the term "troll" forever.

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Poll
Do you believe in trolls?
o No 27%
o Yes, I am irrational 72%

Votes: 54
Results | Other Polls

Related Links
o Slashdot
o Kuro5hin
o secret sids
o Geekizoid. com
o Also by qpt


Display: Sort:
"Trolls": A Ridiculous Liberal Myth | 49 comments (22 topical, 27 editorial, 1 hidden)
Agreed... (4.33 / 3) (#1)
by nads on Sat May 26, 2001 at 05:54:07 PM EST

There does seem to be quite a bit of exageration reguarding the prescence of trolls. I've been using /. for quite a while and Kuro5hin for a few months, and haven't really come across a clear cut example of a 'troll' (i.e. in the sense of provocation, not juvenile goatse.cx links). However, I think the link to post-modernism (which I despise) is weak, and as such I voted don't care. I think you'd be better of splitting the two parts, of course I don't know if anyone would care for a rant on post-modernism, as thats been done a million times before.

Postmodernism (3.66 / 6) (#2)
by shoeboy on Sat May 26, 2001 at 05:56:27 PM EST

I don't know if anyone would care for a rant on post-modernism, as thats been done a million times before.

Postmodernism makes me think of Heidi Wall.

--Shoeboy
No more trolls!
[ Parent ]
I dunno... (4.00 / 3) (#27)
by xriso on Sun May 27, 2001 at 03:09:40 AM EST

I'd say that shoeboy makes me think of Heidi Wall, thereby excluding all possibility of other things doing so.
--
*** Quits: xriso:#kuro5hin (Forever)
[ Parent ]
Falling for the troll. (4.20 / 5) (#4)
by maquina on Sat May 26, 2001 at 06:22:54 PM EST

In my judgement a troll is someone who posts opinions that aren't his/her own, with the sole purpose of stir controversy. These posts don't have any backup points or some shadow of truth in them. You assume that every person who posts at kuro5hin has a "passion for intellect" which is untrue. And even if everyone which posted in kuro5hin had a passion for intellect it wouldnt matter. People betray their passions everyday.

Believing that there are no trolls is the same as believing that there are no serial killers. Serial killers commit murders just for self gratification. In the same way trolls stir controversy just for self gratification. Believing that there are no people like that is absurd.


Falling for your troll and thus proving them.

Irving

Why we must stop the trolls (4.66 / 9) (#6)
by alprazolam on Sat May 26, 2001 at 07:06:30 PM EST

Again the arch conservatives come at us with their irrational arguments against the existence of trolls. Well we all know that trolls have been proven to exist many times over, so I'll skip to the important stuff.

We must stop the trolls from spreading their violent and hateful misinformation, who's goal is to secretly and quickly spread a misogynistic mental state into the world's youth. There is a vast conspiracy, nearly on the scale of the Illuminati, who's sole purpose exists to muddle the minds of the innocent in an attempt to enrich the big oil companies and enslave women. Dick Cheney, a well known troll, uses the cover of George Bush to distract from his trolling. And his supposed enemy Al Gore is actually a disguised conservative troll, who is responsible for leaking much of Clinton's scandals.

The moral of the story is you can never know who the trolls are, just because they appear to be standing up to prominent trolls, they may be attempting an underhanded reverse trolling technique by which they brainwash the youth of today before signing them up into the troll army. Sites like geekizoid exist merely to distract us from the true trolls, like the WNBA, Ford Motor Company, and the IRS.

hehe (4.33 / 3) (#7)
by xriso on Sat May 26, 2001 at 07:19:54 PM EST

OK quantum_pixie, that's nice...

However, I have seen trolls in the sids, and #trolls/OPN. The reason they are trolls: They call themselves trolls, and they try to live up to the name. On #trolls, pretty much, they hang out talking about all sorts of things, just like any other IRC channel. Then, a bot alerts them all to a new slashdot story, and they write up their little trolls, and say, "Well, here's my effort: http://...". Once all the slashbots start responding, it's a bit of a contest to see who got the most replies ("+5 and 50 replies!"). Then everybody gets a good laugh out of all the usual types of response: The point-by-point rebuttal, the flame, and of course the trollbust.

I don't see why people are afraid of trolls. They play a good "devil's advocate", and they help people to be critical thinkers. They also keep discussions alive, because when all you have is groupthink, it's really boring. However, one thing that is rather annoying is the crapflooders that can often be found at geekizoid. They don't really contribute at all, and that's why moderation systems exist.

Well, good troll, quantum_pixie. I am happy to bite.
--
*** Quits: xriso:#kuro5hin (Forever)

Free Will, Ignoring Content and Child Psychology (4.71 / 7) (#18)
by Mabb on Sun May 27, 2001 at 12:00:26 AM EST

I have never understood why people get their knickers in a knot about trolls.

I've been a net user since 1988 and lived in the original domain of the troll - usenet. There were lots of great news-reading programs that allowed me to ignore message subjects, threads and authors that I wasn't interested in. I was an IRC user when it was all command-line driven and we had quite a few commands to ignore nuisance users. This is not a new thing. The ability to ignore people has been built into the net since its inception (how easy is it to ignore email?)

On K5, I can ignore whatever I like. I don't use comment ratings to sort/show comments because I like to make up my own mind on their read-worthiness. I can look at the author, the subject and the first couple of lines of text to make a very quick decision about whether to read on or scroll on. I can rate comments as I see fit, or completely ignore them if that's what they warrant. We even have this terrific untrusted user thing and the ability to hide comments. It worked a charm for qpt and his silly -1 comments, didn't it?

So, given that it's always been easy to take no notice of people who post silly, annoying and deliberately provocative messages in unmoderated forums, why indeed do some people play right into the hands of these disruptors?

This endless dialogue about how to stop trolls gives the nuisance a huge amount of attention - doh! that's their primary goal!

Much time is spent designing all sorts of anti-troll schemes - schemes that will make users' enjoyment of the forum plummet, its usability decline, and discussion of which completely disrupts the forum - but they just might stop trolls from posting as much as they did before.

I learned a little child psychology when I first became a parent and there is a golden rule that applies very well in this situation:

Do not reinforce unacceptable behaviour

So, when your 2-year-old has a tantrum in the supermarket, you ignore it. You walk away. You go on with your shopping as normal. You do not pick up the child and try to quieten it, you do not yell at it, you do not attempt to punish it. By taking notice, you are telling the child that this behaviour is effective in gaining your attention. Whether negative or positive, it's still attention and the behaviour is reinforced and will be repeated.

I think the analogy is pretty clear...


Cadw'r Ddysgl yn Wastad -- keep the dish level
Erm, I disagree (3.60 / 5) (#31)
by donky on Sun May 27, 2001 at 10:00:19 AM EST

So, when your 2-year-old has a tantrum in the supermarket, you ignore it.

I think this is a simplistic and unrealistic response.

Personally, when I feel the need to respond to a troll, it is because they repeat a popularist view which tends to be incorrect and/or misleading and so detracts from the effectiveness of your participation. If you let that ride, the whole point of discussion is defeated for you and perhaps discussion means very little to you.

My 2 shillings. Spend them wisely.



[ Parent ]
usenet (4.20 / 5) (#34)
by tfrayner on Sun May 27, 2001 at 02:00:38 PM EST

Ahh, how I remember the likes of Ludwig Plutonium on the astronomy (and other) newsgroups. Now there was a guy who knew how to troll. The *.advocacy groups were also full of trolls. Compared to the likes of those, kuro5hin (and for that matter, the other site) is virtually troll-free. The ratings systems make a huge improvement to filtering out what there is. Not that I'm advocating complacency; however I think we don't need to panic just yet. +1FP :-)

(I see that Ludwig is now Archimedes. I'm not in favour of disseminating his hypotheses, and finding his web page is easy enough so I'll omit the link).



[ Parent ]

indeed (4.50 / 4) (#46)
by core10k on Tue May 29, 2001 at 11:42:02 PM EST

Let's not forget the center of the Usenet universe, alt.atheism.

Now there's a site that has expert trollers. Lame goats*.*x links are nothing compared to the power of the cross-post.



[ Parent ]
scope of problem (3.00 / 1) (#47)
by alprazolam on Thu May 31, 2001 at 03:02:31 PM EST

nobody minds a few trolls here and there. but when people start tr ying to out troll trolls, and then try to troll trolls, and trying to troll those who troll trolls...well its very odd and not very interesting.

[ Parent ]
I hereby propose John Saul Montoya's Conundrum (4.60 / 10) (#21)
by Anonymous 242 on Sun May 27, 2001 at 01:11:37 AM EST

Similiar to Godwin's Law, if in a debate one party accuses another of being a troll, the accused has the right to invoke John Saul's Conundrum and declare victory in the debate.

Although one must keep in mind that just because the vast majority of the unamerican commnunists unearthed by Joe McCarthy's commitee on unamerican activities were neither unamerican nor communist, it does not follow that some of the unamerican communist so unearthed were not truly unamerican and communist.

Brilliant! (3.60 / 5) (#24)
by Pseudonym on Sun May 27, 2001 at 02:59:14 AM EST

Well done, qpt. This was really clever. Right up there with proving that gravity is a social construct. :-)



sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
You didn't know? (4.25 / 4) (#25)
by xriso on Sun May 27, 2001 at 03:03:58 AM EST

Gravity is a social construct. The only reason we acknowledge it is because our faulty senses convey the notion to us. Just like the straightness of light "rays" (disproven by quantum physics, by the way), our senses have fooled us into believing in gravity.

Sheesh, you'd think people would know more science. Maybe it's the invasion of the slashbots. Oh well, it was inevitable...

*Removes tongue from cheek*
--
*** Quits: xriso:#kuro5hin (Forever)
[ Parent ]

I hear they think highly of you on #troll (3.22 / 9) (#30)
by your_desired_username on Sun May 27, 2001 at 09:33:17 AM EST

This story is obviously a troll. You are trying to make me so furious that will posts hundreds of insulting and ridiculous replies. Well, I won't fall for it. Get back under your bridge. Go bother some billy goats. You are an idiot, and jerk, and one of those foul monsters that contributes to the demise of k5.

st00pit (4.36 / 11) (#35)
by 2400n81 on Sun May 27, 2001 at 02:53:02 PM EST

to think someone actually spent time typing this out when they could have probably better spent it wanking

[ot] nutsackdance (4.00 / 3) (#36)
by fluffy grue on Sun May 27, 2001 at 03:24:05 PM EST

I just wanted you to know that not only did I find nutsackdance strangely amusing, but it was eerily synchronized to the industrial-gothic music I'm listening to right now.


--
"Is not a quine" is not a quine.
I have a master's degree in science!

[ Hug Your Trikuare ]
[ Parent ]

"Liberals": A Ridiculous Conservative My (3.25 / 4) (#41)
by Tachys on Sun May 27, 2001 at 10:30:10 PM EST

<insert long boring rant here>

Kicking the "bunk" out of a "troll& (4.00 / 7) (#43)
by Code Name D on Tue May 29, 2001 at 08:47:46 AM EST

I'll admit, I voted this article front page, if only to see it get it's just rewords. But I do feel there is some legitimate "bunk" that needs to be aired out. However, do not miss-interpret my +1 vote as support for the article, as I will shortly demonstrate.

By qpt Sat May 26th, 2001 at 05:23:06 PM EST

An outside observer, on noticing the recent flurry of meta articles, might easily come to the conclusion that Kuro5hin.org is facing a crisis. To that extent, the observer would be correct. However, the nature of this crisis has been systematically misrepresented at every turn. Worse, the proposed fixes would in fact exacerbate the true cause of Kuro5hin's ills.

To be blunt, the Kuro5hin community is being consumed with paranoia and hysteria in response to a threat that does not even exist. While no doubt many people's belief in trolls is well-meaning, it is most definitely badly informed. Over the course of this article, the myth of the existence of trolls will be systematically debunked. Finally, some clues to the origin of the myth will be examined, most pointing to post-modern liberal ideologies.

You're opening comment is surpassingly vague and fractured, leading me to wonder the following things.

(1) What is the nature of this "crises" that you have observed. The best that you have offered is "paranoia and hysteria." But I have been around the political mulberry bush enough times to know that one man's "hysteria" is another mans march to the gas chambers. My suspicions of this possibility are raised by your adding, "the nature of this crisis has been systematically misrepresented at every turn," leading me to wonder if even your claims of paranoia will pan out.

(2) To watch you attempt to try and disprove the existences of trolls should prove interesting. But I must wonder if you are wise enough to know that for such an esoteric term as "troll," you must first define what a troll is. Once doing so, it will be even more interesting how a definition you yourself sight doesn't exist.

(3) With your final sentience of the introduction, I can already see that you are going to try and link "trolls" with some form of "liberal ideology" of some form. All though I will admit that it is largely reactionary, this is a major red flag to mark a coming conservative ranting piece going on about how "liberals" are doing evil this or evil that. The possibility of bias is further supported by your poll. Do I believe in Trolls? Answers: No; and Yes, I am irrational.

Of course, you are just getting started. So I will wait and measure your arguments in due course.

It has been said that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and such evidence will be provided. However, it is important to first realize the difficulty inherent to any argument for a negative proposition. In truth, any belief in trolls is ultimately unfalsifiable, and as such cannot be disproved. However, the goal here is to rightfully oust that belief from the realm of shared objectivity. If one wishes to believe in trolls, such is one's right. However, that belief must be constructed as a personal claim of faith, not as a statement of objective fact.

Let me get this straight. You are quantifying the non-existence of "trolls" as a negative. Seems logical so far, and of course you can not disprove prove a negative. But if this is so, you are already in trouble.

I have observed many a creationist argue that evolution is a theory that is unfalsifiable, then spend four hours trying to falsify it. I fear you are running into the same trap.

First, it will be helpful to specify the exact nature of the imagined crises. If the worst panic-mongers are to be believed, Kuro5hin.org is currently being besieged by a vast army of posters who post solely for the purpose of causing controversy. To objectively examine this claim, it is necessary to ask what, who, and why.

Again, once man's propaganda is another man's news. I may be new to K5, but I think that the whole point of this forum is to bring up and disuse various issues. No doubt, many of them are controversial. If discussing a controversial issue is some how inappropriate in this forum, then where should it be tolerated?

What is the nature of this attack? If the claim of a troll invasion is to based in fact, one should be able to find ample evidence of inflammatory, worthless posts. However, the posts simply do not exist. Certainly much of which is written in Kuro5hin.org may offend various individuals to differing degrees, but there is not a large group of comments that express no tenable opinion and only inflame and cause offense.

To what "attack" are you referring. So far, I haven't even seen an antidotal example to present. Your train of thought is clearly being interrupted. You seem to have two arguments going here. (1) The posting of hysteria and propaganda and (2) the issue of Trolls.

But you have offered a falsifiable claim and a terse definition of a troll. (A) A troll is some one who writes inflammatory posts and (B) by finding inflammatory posts, we know troll's exists.

Who is the source of this attack? This is also difficult to determine. In the course of researching this article, I visited many alleged troll meeting places, including "secret sids" on Slashdot.org, Geekizoid.com, and the channel #trolls on slashnet. Without exception, I found these places to be inhabited either by extremely juvenile posters engaging in puerile antics or bored individuals simply discussing everyday topics. The trolls of myth were nowhere to be seen.

Wouldn't "puerile antics" qualify as inflammatory? It is becoming clear that so far, you have not crystallized the definition of exactly what a "troll." Certainly you haven't defined verbatim. So how can we possibly believe you even know what you are looking for.

Plus going to places where "alleged troll meeting places" I would think would be the least likely place to find "trolls." So far, the best definition of a "troll" that we have is some one who rights inflammatory posts. A skin head is not likely to post an inflammatory post in a KKK message board. But if you were to find a skin head in a civil rights message board, such inflammatory posts would seem to be inhabitable. So you probably did not look in the right places.

While some posters no doubt use more aggressive language than others. On the whole, most members of the Kuro5hin.org community present a coherent and consistent world view. Admittedly, some individuals appear to have a particular issue about which they routinely squabble, but this is to be expected in any group as diverse as Kuro5hin.org's user base. Importantly, there plainly is not a army of people routinely posting contradictory and provocative material.

You seem to be backing off of your own claim. First, of trolls do not exist, than MOST is a qualification that would argue they do in fact exist. For your original claim to stand, you must argue that NONE submit an inflammatory post. Here is where your proving a negative bits you in the end. How can you present evidence that doesn't exist? On the other side of the coin however, if one person can present you with an inflammatory post taken from K5, then your claim is refuted.

Finally, why would anyone engage in the alleged behavior? Why would anyone expend the necessary time and effort to write contradictory nonsense for the sole purpose of arousing tempers? The proposition is patently absurd. The passion of the intellect demands that one remains true to one's deepest convictions. To violate these passions would be an odious task to anyone. It is ridiculous to suppose that many would voluntarily engage in such behavior.

Why indeed. I submit to you that there are in fact a number of reasons why such a person would submit a trolling post. The most notable is hatred. If a troll is one who writes inflammatory posts, than his purpose would then have to be intentionally inflammatory. Have you ever heard of a skin head that DIDN'T insult the black community at every turn and opportunity? This type of troll would clearly fit inside your definition.

Another motivation would be ignorance (a class that you would fit into.) For example, you have already seen some of the comments in regards to you post. Are they inflammatory? All though it isn't wise to presume your opinion on this, I find it difficult to conceive that you wouldn't be at least irked by the criticism that you are receiving for an article that you clearly but a lot of work and thought into. From your perspective, then you would have to be surrounded by trolls. And here is where your constant comments in regards to "attacks" may come into play, or so I might argue.

How dose this make YOU the troll when (from your perspective) it is the others who are sending inflammatory posts? Two reasons. First: they are responding to your original post. You are the cause that prompts "their" effect. Second: the responses are not inflammatory. They would only seem that way (I presume admittedly) from your perspective.

Even my own article is not inflammatory. You will not that I have not said any thing of any slanderous quality of any form. You will find myself calling you a "troll", but only because I am arguing that this post would qualify under even your terse definition of a troll.

It is obvious, then, that the myth of trolls has little basis in truth. However, the question of its origin remains. Although this is impossible to determine with absolute certainty, the most probable explanation lies in post-modern liberal philosophy. One of the overriding themes in post-modern western thought is the individualized relativity of truth. However, because of inherent intellectual passions, disagreements are impossible to avoid. This presents a paradox. One wishes very much to argue against another, but if truth is individualized, there are no grounds on which to do so.

Ah, here is where you rest your argument on an the non-existent table. I submit to you that your claims are far from obvious, and so far, are totally contrived, if not inherently flawed.

Now we move forward to your argument of origins. Already I see you are pulling out the position of "moral relativism." I have seen this used many a time by conservatives are wish to argue about the "wishy washy morality" of liberals. This is a horrific straw man. Conservatives argue that the "truth" is a concept commonly called "moral-absolutes," that "right is always right, and wrong is always wrong, no mater who, where, what why or when." In turn they argue that "moral relativism" is an effort to "personalize morality" or "your wrong is my right."

Your "paradox" is non-existent. First off, there is a difference between "truth" and "fact." But in addressing your own argument at face value, you're argument is still flawed. If two persons have differing positions of "truth" meat each other. Then why would they not have grounds for debate? One would think this is an ideal condition for debate to take place. After all, what is the point of debate if both persons are in complete agreement.

When truth is relative, the only criticism is insincerity. The only remaining means of disapproval is claims that one's opponent does not actually think what he is professing, and upon honest reflection would recant. The troll hysteria represents an extreme instance of this attitude. Faced with opinions that are utterly irreconcilable with their own, many of Kuro5hin.org's members resort to accusations of trickery and insincerity.

These are tactics of liberal debaters? I doubt this most strongly. It is usually conservatives who make the claims of liberals that "they don't even understand what they believe" or simply flat out accuse them of lying outright. Most liberal debaters that I know posse challenges for conservative debaters to answer. Usually in the form of explanation to make clear their argument or to address short comings or false claims.

It is usually the conservative debater that is faced with opinions that are "are utterly irreconcilable with their own" and then argue that liberals are "idiots" to make those arguments.

By your own argument, trolls do not exists from the liberal perspective because "differing opinions" demonstrating the weakness of your argument.

Although crying "troll" perhaps provides more immediate gratification, the long-term health of Kuro5hin.org demands that we as a community learn to accept the differences of opinion that our diverse membership holds. For the sake of peaceful intellectual discourse, it is time to retire the term "troll" forever.

I sincerely doubt that the term "troll" will be retired. In fact if you are reading this, you will note that you are being branded a troll yourself.

And now I will press foreword with the counter argument.

Your last comment brings to mind the subject of what I have heard coined as "diversity inclusion" or basically the idea that poor ideas (such as creationism) deserves equally time and at equal footing as more mainstream ideas (such as evolution). The converse of this is commonly called "intellectual freedom" (the freedom to teach and learn real facts, as oppose to "facts" merle presented as real.)

For example, you can not say that the world is round, while at the same time being required to also say the world is flat. Like wise you can not teach evolution while also teaching false information such as the world was created by God in seven days.

This is a big problem for conservatives because many conservative notions are founded on I'll conceived notions. Arguments such as supply side economics and school vouchers simply can not stand on their own. They can't because they are not true. In response, conservatives come up with this "diversity inclusion" by trying to pass off bad science as a free speech issue.

But getting the conservative agenda out in the open is the easy part. Once there, the arguments they present are vulnerable to criticism. More often than not, this criticism is blistering. And here is where you "troll" argument comes in. You are trying to argue that a conservative response is not a "troll" because they don't exist, thus allowing the illusion of cover for poorly conceived and framed ideas.

To quote a mentor of mine. "As long as you insist on sticking your nose in the fan, the fan will always insist on cutting it off."

As for stopping trolls, I have this advice. "Do not feed the trolls. It only makes them mad."
(_) Truth dispatched by mer logic, was never truth to begin with.

Wow. (4.40 / 5) (#45)
by CaptainZornchugger on Tue May 29, 2001 at 02:16:46 PM EST

Now That was funny.


Look at that chord structure. There's sadness in that chord structure.
[ Parent ]
beautiful... (4.00 / 2) (#48)
by skeezix on Fri Jun 01, 2001 at 10:03:40 AM EST

this article is a classic example of a troll...

;)

"Trolls": A Ridiculous Liberal Myth | 49 comments (22 topical, 27 editorial, 1 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!