Why do people feed the trolls?

[fox9988]

Honest question. Trolling responses will not be addressed (by me), and there's a good chance you've already been blocked so I won't see them.

Is it boredom? The need to be heard? Can't resist the urge to post?
If it weren't for replies, trolling wouldn't exist.

[Shrew]

Trolls are like telemarketers. Nobody wants them, but they insinuate themselves into the medium (phone, internet, e-mail, forums, etc) whether we like it or not. Like telemarketers they are savvy in their methods of impersonation and deceit.

I have an old saying I like to lean on "The phone rings at the convenience of the caller, but should be answered at the convenience of the recipient (callee/called??).

You'll never stop them from posting. You'll never stop people from responding. The other day we marveled at the thousands of likes on Twitter for someone (famous) who posted:

"....."

That was it, yet blindly thousands took the time to "LIKE" the twitter post. People as a whole are lemmings.

Incidentally, you can post "Trolling Response will not be addressed", but you've been lulled into thinking you can control people or the organic nature of discussion.

BTW- This thread, in itself, feels a bit like a troll.

[ttex]

Trolling for trolls. How droll.

[fox9988]

Originally Posted by Shrew

Incidentally, you can post "Trolling Response will not be addressed", but you've been lulled into thinking you can control people or the organic nature of discussion.

Good point. Edited for accuracy.

BTW- This thread, in itself, feels a bit like a troll.

Yes. I feel it too.

[redneckrob]

This is like accusing someone of being defensive, no matter how they respond it simply feeds into the original narrative.

In reality most folks definition of "trolling" is "you posted something I disagree with". There's a thread here with 5 pages of rants against California liberal stupidity and then the guy who asked if the alleged rule from the OP everyone was ranting about actually existed (spoiler alert, it didn't) was accused of trolling by simply asking the question. Everything up to then (and seriously, we had someone going on about Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown's budget policies from 40 years ago!) was topical, relevant, prim and proper conversation, but the minute anyone has the temerity to ask the emminently reasonable question as to if the original post's assertion was even actually true, cries of "trolling" go up.

So I'd caution all of us, before throwing out the "trolling" flag, ask one's self if this is really just disagreeing (in what turns out to be a very disagreeable passive aggressive manner)? Would you also make this accusation if the person was saying something you agreed with, and do you hold everyone to this same standard regardless of if you agree with their viewpoint or not?

[fox9988]

Originally Posted by redneckrob

In reality most folks definition of "trolling" is "you posted something I disagree with".

Understood.
My definition is- A thread or post designed to aggravate the audience and incite responses.

[Hardhead]

I think one man's troll is another man's attempt at cleverness. It reveals the intellect of the troll.

[fox9988]

Originally Posted by Hardhead

I think one man's troll is another man's attempt at cleverness. It reveals the intellect of the troll.

With threads such as, "should sailing be banned to conserve the wind for green energy", it's a failed attempt at cleverness. It does reveal the lack of intellect.

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Shrew

The other day we marveled at the thousands of likes on Twitter for someone (famous) who posted:

"....."

That was it, yet blindly thousands took the time to "LIKE" the twitter post.

What's most amazing is that someone who can't even form an ellipsis has any followers at all.

Oh, darn. That comment makes ME the troll. Sorry!

On a serious note, I really do try not to feed trolls, but it's hard to resist a pithy retort when someone says (types) something that offends you, or appears to be directing some negative comment at you or your ideas.

It's like passing an accident on the highway. You know you shouldn't slow down and gawk, but it's just so hard to resist!

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by fox9988

With threads such as, "should sailing be banned to conserve the wind for green energy", it's a failed attempt at cleverness. It does reveal the lack of intellect.

Wait, such a thread exists here? Where, I'd love to read it!

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by fox9988

Honest question...

Really?
An internet troll is an attention whore who posts random, pointless, unsolicited, and/or controversial comments/questions onto websites, in an attempt to get a reaction towards him/her/it, in an attempt to get someone else to acknowledge their pathetic, insignificant lives, since they don't receive that sort of attention in real life.
Mission accomplished?

[Pelagic]

I hate the term "Troll' mainly because I don't understand it!

Communication takes many Forms

People exaggerate for effect!
To stimulate, to hypothesise,

They answer questions with another question ....Socratic Method
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method.

Is Aristotle a Troll ?
https://www.communicationtheory.org/...ication-model/

Seems to me .....Trolling is in the Ear of the Listener.

You engage, you disengage. You react, you ignore.

The term Trolling is far too subjective to have any value other than to insult and demean someone who challenges your own ideas

[fox9988]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Really?
An internet troll is an attention whore who posts random, pointless, unsolicited, and/or controversial comments/questions onto websites, in an attempt to get a reaction towards him/her/it, in an attempt to get someone else to acknowledge their pathetic, insignificant lives, since they don't receive that sort of attention in real life.
Mission accomplished?

Thanks but the original question was why do people feed the trolls, not why do people troll. I do like your definition of a troll.

[grantmc]

Isn't it also that some people just have to take offence? So troll bait is quite simple to throw out, even when unintentioned. A post response in an aggressive/angry manner is heaven sent to a troll and amusing to many readers. And some people are so so easy to wind up.

Someone started a post/poll today called Let's Keep Politics Out today about President Trump. Was this intentional trolling or just someone genuinely trying to garner support from people in agreement with his/her opinions?
I've no idea but the reactions have been as one might expect.

The original post seems somewhat similarly intended. But if you don't have some spice to the posting doesn't it all get real dull real quickly.

Nothing brings out the trolls quicker than a misspelling of words such as they're, their, there or its and it's. Oh diversity; such a wonderful thing.

[redneckrob]

Originally Posted by fox9988

Thanks but the original question was why do people feed the trolls, not why do people troll. I do like your definition of a troll.

I think (hope!) he was being self referentially sarcastic with that definition

Obviously well over half of what is posted here on Cruisers Forum could fall into someone's definition of one of the buckets of "random, pointless, unsolicited, and/or controversial comments/questions", as well over half of real life conversation as well (even among a group of electrical engineers, and we're pretty on-topic most of the time!). Heck, even the most innocently intended question about which anchor to use or "cats vs monos" could well be interpreted as "in an attempt to get a reaction towards him/her/it"! And obviously no one here would label someone's personal life pathetic or insignificant or have any idea of what kind of attention they receive in real life on the basis of a post. Especially given the highly subjective nature of the above listed buckets and the very demonstrable tendency we see for folks to conflate "something I disagree with you about" with "random, pointless, unsolicited, and/or controversial" while ignoring "random, pointless, unsolicited, and/or controversial" posts they don't disagree with. And by the same token, to your question, your definition of "feeding the troll" is another perfectly reasonable, intelligent, and well meaning person's definition of "engaging in an interesting discussion with someone who I happen to disagree with". Hence I really like @Pelagic's analysis of all this, "The term Trolling is far too subjective to have any value other than to insult and demean someone who challenges your own ideas"