How to Deal with an Internet Troll

[Ripper]

I think it's fairly obvious, but I suppose I should expect nothing different from you than feeble attempts at the "exact words" game. Post #32 was directed at Celtic. In post #33, you felt the need to toss in a pithy one-liner. In post #34, I addressed you directly and encouraged you to offer answers rather than insults. To this point, I don't see where you've been bothered to offer the slightest hint at what you would have done differently, nor the criteria you would have used to make your decisions. You know, kinda exactly what I said. Here we are a page later and in all your impressively worded posts and backhanded insults, you've still failed to offer anything resembling a solution.

Here, let me help you. I wouldn't recommend playing the exact words game with this one, but whatever floats your boat.

"I, in my infinite brilliance, would have done things differently than the administration which I have repeatedly called to task. I would have done…….."

"Further displaying my tremendous intellect, the criteria I would use to determine when someone should be banned should a similar situation arise in the future would be…………"

Well, how could anyone be anything but impressed with the administration, now that you're here to represent them.

I don't know why you can't understand what I said in post 30, but I'll spell it out for you in the form of answering your questions, if you like.

Here's my suggestion, for both this and future cases: Use experience and judgement, and take steps when someone's behaviour is obviously escalating and intended to cause trouble. Corwin had the experience and skills to recognise this, and made several attempts behind the scenes. A number of us saw this coming. Precognition is not required to defuse an obviously inflaming situation, and trolling behaviour.

Step in early and publicly. If the rest of the community is doing their part and not flaming the troll directly, I think the admins should do their part, and make it clear that they've recognised the problem and steps are being taken. Instant bans are not called for, but neither is a dismissive attitude to the those that are bothered, or suggesting that it's amusing.

That's my just my view. Myrthos could just tell me that if I don't like it, I can sod off, and I give him credit for not (yet) having done so. He thinks his approach is good for the community, I think it should be modified slightly, and so we're debating it.

I question why you admonish us for troublemaking after the fact, and yet do so in the most provocative and inflammatory way. My Rule 5 was a joke, but one with a point.

 

[Toff]

Anyone watch The Troll Hunter? Not bad. Net flix in the US had it a few months back, its probably still there.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1740707/

 

[Ripper]

We clearly disagree about what a troll wants. You think he's desperate for attention, I think he's bored and wants to be entertained - and it takes a certain kind of attention to provide sufficient entertainment.

Even if it is all about getting attention, it's through fueling the fire and provoking people.

So, no, I don't agree that it's going to entertain them if you belittle their efforts and you pat them on the head, which is how I interpret what happened with Myrthos.

He can correct me if I'm wrong.

They can be mildly amusing - and that's absolutely not the reaction they're looking for.

You're twisting what's happening here.

I don't know who's supposed to be a troll enthusiast.

But, no, I don't think being patted on the head and told you're fun in your own way is what they want. I think that would frustrate them.

That’s all fine, but it’s a considerable modification of the very black and white original statement you made, with which I took issue. My last post to you was attempting to justify why I called it nonsense.

This is your original statement to which I was responding, and it has none of the nuance you have since added:

You don't seem to understand the nature of a troll.

Telling them they're entertaining is discouraging, not encouraging. Well, if they actually believe you're telling the truth.

Trolls want to provoke people, not entertain them.

You were speaking in the general sense; speaking of how ‘a’ troll works, and one’s understanding of it. I was responding to this theory, which is not specific to the exact incident which just occurred - I gave examples to illustrate why that argument is flawed, not to comment on the specifics of this situation. The “troll-enthusiasts” are also generalised - my argument being that by giving feedback to a troll that his behaviour is entertaining people will not act as a deterrent. You have modified this to being about ‘belittling’ the troll, which is quite different, and not at all clear from your original post.

There's a HUGE difference between clapping, laughing or praising - and giving them a sympathic smile. You apparently fail to distinguish between these two reactions.

Yes, there is huge difference , but again, if I fail to distinguish between them in this case, it is because that distinction was not originally present.

You mean you perceive a lack of sympathy which you then project unto everyone here as truth.

No, I’m not projecting, I’m observing a fact - there have been far more posts critical of Celtic’s response than there have been showing concern for what he had to listen to.

EDIT: Take a look at this article, which covers the psychology quite well.
Sorry, I don't do the whole let's link an article back-and-forth game as if that represented actual arguments.

What it takes to argue your case with me is YOUR arguments and YOUR underpinning.

I find it better to provide credible sources where possible, rather than only making my own assertions. With regard to the "underpinning" of my understanding of the psychology, I would always try to use other sources rather than appealing to my own authority.

So far, you've failed to explain why what Myrthos did is supposed to encourage an obvious troll - that's obviously looking to provoke exactly the kind of reaction CelticFrost gave him.

The problem is, there are so many people arguing against my view, that it seems like I’m constantly beating on Myrthos, which is not what I want to do. I clarified my position for DTE - is that sufficient?

 

[DArtagnan]

You were speaking in the general sense; speaking of how ‘a’ troll works, and one’s understanding of it. I was responding to this theory, which is not specific to the exact incident which just occurred - I gave examples to illustrate why that argument is flawed, not to comment on the specifics of this situation. The “troll-enthusiasts” are also generalised - my argument being that by giving feedback to a troll that his behaviour is entertaining people will not act as a deterrent. You have modified this to being about ‘belittling’ the troll, which is quite different, and not at all clear from your original post.

You originally said Unregistered "the troll" was being encouraged because someone called him entertaining.

Then, in this thread - you repeated yourself with this:

Don't encourage obvious trolls on your forum by telling them they're entertaining?

I don't care how you now try to turn this into some kind of generalised debate about how some trolls might actually be encouraged by something nobody here has ever said, it won't work with me.

I haven't modified anything, I'm trying to say the exact same thing in a variety of ways in the hopes that you'll finally understand what Myrthos was saying - and how it would be received by a troll looking to fuel the fire with outrageous statements.

I don't recognise why my claim is flawed - and I stand by it 100%.

Trolls are not encouraged when people remain completely calm and call them "amusing in their own way" without reacting to obvious provocation - and certainly not within the context of how Myrthos said it. In fact, they'll be discouraged by such a reaction. Maybe not visibly so and maybe not immediately - but eventually, that kind of attitude is going to dissuade all but the most stubborn of trolls.

You can dance around looking for some hypothetical example of how being amusing in their own way is some kind of majorly supportive statement - but it'll be bullshit in relation to what we're talking about. You might find some example where the literal translation of "amusing in his own way" being "he's entertaining" might apply - but trust me, you won't have success going that way if you expect me to take you seriously and believe you're being genuine about this.

No, I’m not projecting, I’m observing a fact - there have been far more posts critical of Celtic’s response than there have been showing concern for what he had to listen to.

I have no idea why anyone would think that receiving more feedback relevant to the topic at hand than overt sympathy means there's a "notable lack of sympathy" - but it's certainly anything but a fact.

I find it better to provide credible sources where possible, rather than only making my own assertions. I always try to use other sources rather than appealing to my own authority.

That's your choice, of course. All I'm saying is that it won't work with me - as I don't consider an opinion in some article "credible" based on your claims, anymore than I consider any of your opinions credible without the arguments and support they require to qualify.

As I said, if something in that article is relevant to your point - then I'll gladly respond to specifics, but I'm not going to read an entire article in the hopes of figuring out exactly what you're trying to say.

If that article says something brilliant, then demonstrate - don't let me do the work for you.

The problem is, there are so many people arguing against my view, that it seems like I’m constantly beating on Myrthos, which is not what I want to do. I clarified my position for DTE - is that sufficient?

Maybe that's how it seems to you, but not to me. I don't think you really have much of a problem with Myrthos or this whole thing.

I'm seeing someone struggling with rational arguments, though.

That said, I don't really have the patience to dance around the topic. I like to focus on the topic, and you seem to be turning it into some kind of "generalised" fencing match of words - instead of owning up to what you said and why you said it.

Anyone can dance around the topic and no one is wrong on the Internet, we all know that.

But don't waste my time pretending to stick with the actual topic.

 

[Ripper]

I don't think any of that verbiage convincingly refutes the things I said, so, mercifully, it would seem redundant to go over it all again.

I'm curious about this bit, though:

I like to focus on the topic, and you seem to be turning it into some kind of "generalised" fencing match of words - instead of owning up to what you said and why you said it.

You made a general point about the nature of a troll - therefore in the abstract. I responded in the abstract (in general terms), because that is where you took the conversation. You are simply trying to exploit this simple and normal shift (of your choosing) in the argument as "dancing around the issue" because you are running thin on other options.

What is it that you think I need to "own up to"? I think I've been pretty blunt!

 

[DArtagnan]

You made a general point about the nature of a troll - therefore in the abstract. I responded in the abstract (in general terms), because that is where you took the conversation. You are simply trying to exploit this simple and normal shift in the argument as "dancing around the issue" because you are running thin on other options.

I was talking about a very specific phrase - the (in my opinion) obvious interpretation of which will apply to trolls in general, yes. In other words, this specific phrase will dissuade trolls in general.

However, what you're doing - is turning a very specific phrase into some kind of general declaration of "troll support" that has almost no relation to the actual meaning of the words within this context that you so obviously considered actual encouragement.

What is it that you think I need to "own up to"? I think I've been pretty blunt!

Essentially, I don't have the patience for bullshit.

To make it clearer still:

You said Myrthos was encouraging Unregistered when he said he was harmless and amusing in his own way.

I explained to you that such a statement is, actually, going to discourage trolls (in this case and in general) - because it's not actually supportive. It's more like deflating a balloon before it gets blown up. It takes the fun out of it for a troll.

Then I've given you other ways to look at it, like a pat on the head, a smile at a nutty preacher whilst shaking your head - and so on.

It's like you refuse to accept that's what Myrthos was doing and how it will affect trolls in general if people react like that.

Obviously, it's not going to work if someone throws a fit at the same time.

 

[DArtagnan]

Also, I actually think it will help people like Ripper and CelticFrost to understand Watch policy as a whole, if they first understand what Myrthos was trying to say about Unregistered.

Here, on the Watch, we don't get too excited by trolls - and we, generally, don't react like many others would. We consider them welcome and, believe it or not, trolls don't want to be welcomed - at least not at the outset. They're uncomfortable when you include them without reacting as they want you to.

That's why they tend to leave us alone surprisingly quickly.

It would really help if you appreciated that about the Watch, as I don't think there's much chance of changing the minds of moderators about that lax attitude.

 

[txa1265]

Also, I actually think it will help people like Ripper and CelticFrost to understand Watch policy as a whole, if they first understand what Myrthos was trying to say about Unregistered.

Here, on the Watch, we don't get too excited by trolls - and we, generally, don't react like many others would. We consider them welcome and, believe it or not, trolls don't want to be welcomed - at least not at the outset. They're uncomfortable when you include them without reacting as they want you to.

That's why they tend to leave us alone surprisingly quickly.

It would really help if you appreciated that about the Watch, as I don't think there's much chance of changing the minds of moderators about that lax attitude.

I feel like this should be 'pinned' ... because while through the years I have watched many forums devolve due to over-flaming, over-trolling, or over-moderating, the Watch has been 'chill' and as such we have been able to have some really heated discussions, get up in each others faces on occasion, yet always come back to our shared love of the genre and of PC gaming in general and have enjoyable discussions.

Personally I don't want things to change - I have expressed concern about some of the over-reach leading it to feel like certain indviduals became 'the official voice' of the site, but that has normalized more recently.

 

[Ripper]

I was talking about a very specific phrase - the (in my opinion) obvious interpretation of which will apply to trolls in general, yes. In other words, this specific phrase will dissuade trolls in general.

However, what you're doing - is turning a very specific phrase into some kind of general declaration of "troll support" that has almost no relation to the actual meaning of the words within this context that you so obviously considered actual encouragement.

Well, on this I'm happy to let the record speak for itself. It's there in black and white.

You said Myrthos was encouraging Unregistered when he said he was harmless and amusing in his own way.

No, I said it's not a good idea to tell trolls that they are entertaining. Here is the quote I was referring to.

And to answer the footnotes for me personal. Yes Roqua entertains me and who are those 'we' you are talking about.

There are guidelines in the FAQ. They suffice for our moderators, in combination with my request for 'laid back' moderation, to determine a cause of action.

I'm saying that could very easily be taken as encouragement. The troll certainly felt supported:

Thank you for not being a hate-mongering infantile. Your kind words are much appreciated. I apologize for any heartache, headaches, or hassle I have or will now cause you or the other normal staff at RPG Watch. I appreciate all of your hard work day in and day out. You are good and decent people and I'm sorry the puritans hate me so much and that causes issues for you.

And here is what he said about it on the Codex.

The opening is to one of the cool staff members at rpgwatch that had the sack to stick up for me while the climate was very anti-roqua.

The idea that he was discouraged by this approach, is, most definitely, bullshit.

Then you came along and said that telling trolls they're entertaining is a good way to discourage them. There, I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

Of course, if you are right about trolls being welcomed, and the actually ARE deemed to be entertaining, then my arguments are indeed irrelevant.

 

[DArtagnan]

No, I said it's not a good idea to tell trolls that they are entertaining. Here is the quote I was referring to.

No, that's not the original quote you responded to.

Here from Myrthos:

I agree that the thread titles could have been chosen better, but unrestigered is funny in his own way and harmless on top of that.

Here's from you, two posts after:

You guys really find this entertaining, and want to encourage it on here?

No one else had mentioned anything about entertainment or amusement, so Myrthos is clearly the target of that statement.

This is what I originally tried to explain was the wrong take on it. As in, "amusing in his own way" might be entertaining in a literal sense - but that wasn't the core of the message.

It's like reverse psychology - like smiling at someone who's trying to get a rise out of you.

Yes, they're mildly entertaining like a clown in a circus is entertaining. You think that's what trolls want to be? Of course not.

I'm saying that could very easily be taken as encouragement. The troll certainly felt supported:

Obviously, as that's how you took it. I'm trying to explain how that wasn't what it was - and no, I most definitely don't think the troll felt encouraged in the least.

And here is what he said about it on the Codex.

I think I'm starting to realise your problem here. You actually believe what trolls are saying. You don't seem to understand anything about their psychology.

He's trying to validate his own actions on the Codex by appealing to a crowd of trolls - making himself feel better about what happened.

The idea that he was discouraged by this approach, is, most definitely, bullshit.

He would have been, if it was the general approach - but someone threw a fit and he was, instead, greatly encouraged.

Then you came along and said that telling trolls they're entertaining is a good way to discourage them. There, I think we will just have to agree to disagree.

No, that's not what I said at all - and you know it.

Clearly, you refuse to accept what was meant by the original statement - and you're holding on to your original, literal, interpretation.

You completely ignore the whole concept of Watch policy - and still, you pretend that we're genuinely supportive of trolling and abusive statements.

Like, you're being very deliberately obtuse about this - and we both know why. We don't actually disagree - you're just more comfortable being literal so you can pretend your original statement is valid.

Surprise

 

[pibbur who]

.. he spouted that vicious abuse of Celtic’s children (for which Celtic has received a notable lack of sympathy, BTW)....

Thanks for the reminder. It just drowned under all the other things going on.

pibbur

 

[Ripper]

If you really believe that interpretation of the plain facts, Dart, I sincerely hope you are on the jury of my next murder trial.

No, that's not the original quote you responded to.

What does that have to do with anything? I’m telling you which statement I was referring to in my first post of this thread - the one to which you replied with your troll-discouragement theory, and the one we’ve been discussing ever since.

I originally posed the question, “Do you find this entertaining and want to encourage it?”, to which he replied that, yes, he did find him entertaining, and that moderation should continue to be laid back. The troll then said "Thanks very much - now watch this!" And off he went to the codex to tell the other trolls how he at least got some team support against the puritans!

You say I’m being too literal - because that’s literally what happened. To you, being “too literal” simply means respecting the clear facts, and refusing to accept all the assertions that you want to impose as an implausible alternative narrative.

He's trying to validate his own actions on the Codex by appealing to a crowd of trolls - making himself feel better about what happened.

So, if he’s appealing to a crowd for comfort in one moment, why is it you think that he doesn’t genuinely appreciate and respond to the acceptance and positivity provided here?

You claim that trolls are only seeking entertainment from the upset caused by their attacks, rather than positive attention - then why would he need to be “validated”, and need to be made to “feel better”?

And why would he need to be made to feel better at all after deliberately getting one of his disposable alts banned in an epic and successful trolling, of which he is clearly proud?

I’m afraid it is you, Dart, who has no insight into this psychology, which, perhaps, is to your credit.

 

[Eye]

I originally posed the question, “Do you find this entertaining and want to encourage it?”, to which he replied that, yes, he did find him entertaining, and that moderation should continue to be laid back. The troll then said "Thanks very much - now watch this!" And off he went to the codex to tell the other trolls how he at least got some team support against the puritans!

When - if - a troll finds encouragement in your words, that does not mean you encouraged him, let alone to take things a step further. It's a one way street:

Myrthos found Unregistered funny in his own way, based on what he had seen from Roqua in the past. "You must know that this is Roqua. He has been with us, on and off for quite some time. Taking him serious is a mistake."

Your words: "The troll then said "Thanks very much - now watch this!" - that does not mean Myrthos found THAT funny too, no, quite the contrary: Myrthos banned him immediately. Or do you think banning someone is a way to show your encouragement or support?

When someone has shown to be harmless for quite some time, why on earth can't you say someone is funny in his own way? There are many weirdos in this world, and on this site, and some are funny, or perhaps just an irritating but nice topic to talk about, a funny break amidst seriousness.

 

[Corwin]

It might surprise some of you, but history counts here. If a long time good poster in the heat of a 'discussion' breaks our rules, I'm more likely to PM that person and remind them that they know better, whereas someone new would get a MUCH more strongly worded message. We try to treat everyone fairly, but HOW we do that is open to some flexibility. Many of us have known Roqua and his 'unique' posting style for over 10 years!!

 

[Ripper]

It might surprise some of you, but history counts here. If a long time good poster in the heat of a 'discussion' breaks our rules, I'm more likely to PM that person and remind them that they know better, whereas someone new would get a MUCH more strongly worded message. We try to treat everyone fairly, but HOW we do that is open to some flexibility. Many of us have known Roqua and his 'unique' posting style for over 10 years!!

Yes, I looked at a few of his old posts. This was his final post as Roqua, before switching to an alt. I noted your comment in the moderator edit:

Last edited by Corwin; October 16th, 2008 at 05:23. Reason: Last paragraph was inappropriate for this site.

If he has a long history of posting unacceptable stuff on the site, under various sock puppets, doesn't that lend weight to the idea that he required a tougher line?

 

[sakichop]

I'm saying that could very easily be taken as encouragement. The troll certainly felt supported:

Obviously, as that's how you took it. I'm trying to explain how that wasn't what it was - and no, I most definitely don't think the troll felt encouraged in the least.



He would have been, if it was the general approach - but someone threw a fit and he was, instead, greatly encouraged.

Dart, I'm curious as to how you reconcile these 2 statements? Given the results they don't seem accurate.

You say he wasn't encouraged by myrthos comments but he did thank myrthos for his kind words, which would seem to indicate that he was encouraged.

You say he was greatly encouraged after Celtics post but that's when he went crazy and left which would seem like he wasn't encouraged at all.

I'm starting to wonder if he wasn't trolling at all, maybe he honestly thought his posts were funny and would be well received. When they weren't he got mad and went a bit crazy.

I also wonder with his long history of posting here apparently, if he felt he was among friends. I know I have told some pretty crude jokes that were appropriate with friends that get my sense of humor that I know would never be received well by the general public that doesn't "get me". Maybe he lack the ability to distinguish between thing that would be appropriate for good friends but wouldn't be for strangers.

Let me add though, I'm not saying what he posted was funny. I found the killing children rant to be pretty disgusting.

 

[Ripper]

I'm starting to wonder if he wasn't trolling at all, maybe he honestly thought his posts were funny and would be well received. When they weren't he got mad and went a bit crazy.

I also wonder with his long history of posting here apparently, if he felt he was among friends. I know I have told some pretty crude jokes that were appropriate with friends that get my sense of humor that I know would never be received well by the general public that doesn't "get me". Maybe he lack the ability to distinguish between thing that would be appropriate for good friends but wouldn't be for strangers.

That's very astute, and an interesting take on it.

EDIT: You know, thinking about it, I think it's a bit of both - antagonistic trolling as a form of humor, by which the inside crowd have fun at the expense of the out group. This is very much the prevailing atmosphere at the codex, which I'm assuming is where he completed his training. (He received 6 'bro fists' when he reposted his abuse of Celtic over there.)

There were one or two members here who seemed to be attuned to this behavior, that lend credibility to this idea of a kind of social trolling. Here is one comment from one of Roqua's last threads:

Man, Unristigered you came back in full force and already riled up half the people here. Keep it up!

 

[CelticFrost]

What I find funny about this is I had no clue who had posted the titles as I didn't click on them to even find out what they were.

I wasn't looking to start a fight with anyone and I still wonder if Titles like Killing children or anything with Perv. in the title should show up on the main page here.

So as the debate on the Troll has been interesting, I couldn't even have told you if you had ask if it was the same person that had made those Thread titles. Not saying I might have guess it was the same person but it could have been someone that had just joined here that day never mind this person with a few nic names.

 

[Myrthos]

I wonder why you still wonder if those thread titles should appear on the front page. You keep on repeating that as if nothing happened. They were changed by a moderator not too long after he posted them, so I think it is safe to assume that they should not.

 

[DArtagnan]

Dart, I'm curious as to how you reconcile these 2 statements? Given the results they don't seem accurate.

You say he wasn't encouraged by myrthos comments but he did thank myrthos for his kind words, which would seem to indicate that he was encouraged.

You say he was greatly encouraged after Celtics post but that's when he went crazy and left which would seem like he wasn't encouraged at all.

I'm starting to wonder if he wasn't trolling at all, maybe he honestly thought his posts were funny and would be well received. When they weren't he got mad and went a bit crazy.

I also wonder with his long history of posting here apparently, if he felt he was among friends. I know I have told some pretty crude jokes that were appropriate with friends that get my sense of humor that I know would never be received well by the general public that doesn't "get me". Maybe he lack the ability to distinguish between thing that would be appropriate for good friends but wouldn't be for strangers.

Let me add though, I'm not saying what he posted was funny. I found the killing children rant to be pretty disgusting.

I find it very easy to reconcile.

Let's pretend I'm right about this person, that he's a troll looking to provoke people.

Do you really think he's going to say to Myrthos:

"Darn it, Myrthos, now I'm frustrated - and that's discouraging"?

No, he's going to keep pretending that he's been serious all along. That's the game.

But, by that point, it was lost.

When I say it's discouraging - it doesn't mean it's going to work if it's not the general response.

I really find it strange that I have to explain to veteran Internet posters how trolls work.

You could have 99 out of 100 participants ignoring or deflating the balloon - but it does nothing if just 1 person is still blowing it up.

It HAS to be the general response - not just the response of one person.

HiddenX already posted an excellent guide on how to deal with trolls.

The only problem with ignoring trolls is that they might come back - because they're not sure if their bullshit was actually read or not. So, they'll try again at some point.

If you "play along" and deflate the balloon before it gets a chance to blow up - that will be discouraging in the LONG term. But, again, it HAS to be the general response. It does nothing if one person throws a fit.

Think of a troll as an agent of chaos. They're here to plant a seed of riot - and then to watch the show. They're usually lazy and apathetic - so they're not going to stick around forever no matter what you do.

CelticFrost reacted strongly, in my opinion, and that was like candy to a troll. As such, the riot had already started - and he left once it became too much work to keep pretending to be serious.

I find it absolutely amazing that you guys can't work this out for yourselves. I mean, just look at the thread titles and the post content.

If this person was genuine or truly seriously deranged - he wouldn't be using obvious click-bait titles - and the content wouldn't be a haphazard amalgation of the most controversial shit he could come up with.

He wanted to start a fire and watch it burn - and CelticFrost made it burn.

Eventually, it became boring - and he left. He then went bragging to fellow trolls on the Codex - playing his game.

To me, it's banal and obvious.

I don't know how else to put it.

If you really want to believe that throwing a fit is discouraging - and that calling an obvious troll "harmless and amusing in his own way" is going to encourage more trolling - that's ok with me.

I simply can't agree.