5 ms·
I think the problem is just that people use one word, "troll", for too many different things. We can keep using "troll" for people who are saying things to get
by bshanks 10y ago
I think the problem is just that people use one word, "troll", for too many different things.
We can keep using "troll" for people who are saying things to get people riled up [http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/warriorshtm/troller.htm http://www.flamewarriorsguide.com/warriorshtm/troller.htm].
But we need to call people who pick on others "bullies".
As for scum who post threats, email pictures of dead people to their family members [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikki_Catsouras_photographs_controversy#Leaked_photographs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikki_Catsouras_photographs_co...], etc, we may need a third word. I can't think of a good one -- is there something like "pervert" but without the sexual overtones? Maybe "thug", although that also might not be the best choice? "Stalker" is used ironically too often. "Scum" sounds too over-the-top.
- anigbrowl 10y agoYou know, I'm past worrying about the feelings of trolls. They're not owed fun or any protection for the activities they enjoy, and if they don't like getting kicked out of civil forums for acting like assholes then too bad.
- bshanks 10y agoI quite agree with you. I'm only saying that when you talk about bullying to third parties using the word "troll", sometimes the third party will imagine something less serious than is actually happening.
- anigbrowl 10y agoAh, I see - I overlooked the fact of being rooted in internet culture for longer and more deeply than the general population sometimes impedes communication. I'm always on the lookout for better words to get key concepts across so I'll add 'troll' to my list of terms that need a better descriptor.
- cookiecaper 10y agoThe issue is that everyone has a different perspective on what constitutes "trolling" and what doesn't. These "civil forums" frequently develop a habit of banning anyone who tries to do anything other than shout more echos into the echo chamber on the pretext that they're "trolls" or otherwise unsavory community members. A policy that encourages such casual non-concern for participants is likely to result in some very one-sided outcomes.
- anigbrowl 10y agoSorry, I don't think that's an accurate reflection of online social dynamics. Echo chambers certainly exist and I've run into that same problem myself, but I managed to disagree without disputing other people's freedom to participate in such forums, doxxing people, making death threats, or engaging in any of the other activities that obnoxious trolls are well-known for.
- dfabulich 10y agoEven the word "bully" isn't strong enough. "Bully" is a diminutive term that sounds like it describes an unimportant/childish problem. (The word originally meant "lover" or "friend" in Dutch.) When the target is an online community, I use the term "attacker" in the infosec sense. When someone sends threats, I think the best term is "harassment."
- bshanks 10y agoI think "attacker" and "harassment" are both accurate but I feel that they are too clinical/adult/long/abstract for people to get angry about. You want words that a 5-year-old understands, and you want words that conjure an image.
- Freak_NL 10y ago> The word originally meant "lover" or "friend" in Dutch. That doesn't seem very relevant though; modern day Dutch language speakers have absolutely no such association with that word — the word it came from is not in modern use and is unknown to most. Only a dedicated linguist would recognize the Dutch etymology of 'bully'.