5 ms·

"trolling behavior in discussion communities, defined in the literature as behavior that falls outside acceptable bounds defined by those communities" Is this

"trolling behavior in discussion communities, defined in the literature as behavior that falls outside acceptable bounds defined by those communities" Is this the definition you would use for "trolling behavior"? It's not what I was expecting, and greatly changes my understanding of what the study is looking at compared to the title.

striking 10y ago
> A troll has been defined in multiple ways in previous literature as a person who initially pretends to be a legitimate participant but later attempts to disrupt the community[26], as someone who “intentionally disrupts online communities”[77], or “takes pleasure in upsetting others” [47], or more broadly as a person engaging in “negatively marked online behavior” [37] or that “makes trouble” for a discussion forums’ stakeholders [9]. > In this paper, similar to the latter studies, we adopt a definition of trolling that includes flaming, griefing, swearing, or personal attacks, including behavior outside the acceptable bounds defined by several community guidelines for discussion forums [22, 25, 35]. You may have missed part of the relevant section there.
Terr_ 10y ago
Yeah, I'm not sure what credence to give to "the literature" they cite. Just speaking for me personally, I was musing on it long ago [0] and I'd like to suggest three starting points: 1. Trolling always means the user is, in some way, not sincere or not honest in their interactions. 2. Trolling is always about triggering or goading victims into a reaction. 3. Trolling is not the same as humor, trolling can incorporate humor, but only in a "mean-spirited" way. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/p7u3k/troll_level_master/c3n98ia/ https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/p7u3k/troll_level_ma...
- insickness 10y ago
  #2 gets closest. South Park's latest season was a very insightful satire of Trump as the ultimate troll. Online trolls originally pushed Trump's candidacy as a way of antagonizing the virtue-signaling left. Of all the Republican candidates he was the most leftfield in the sense that he had no political experience and was also the least politically correct. He was brash and mean to the other candidates and seemed not to care if what he said came off as insensitive or even racist/sexist. Trump's success in the primaries triggered the left into over-reacting and running a campaign which contained far too much identity politics. Many felt the left was already overusing the racist/sexist card. Trump was easy bait to push them even further, exposing them and making them seemed like that's ALL they cared about.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - Terr_ 10y ago
    > #2 gets closest. Well, those aren't alternatives, I'm saying that "trolling" requires all three. > Trump as the ultimate troll You want to bring politics into this? Ah well, I guess people can minus-click the thread. Whether Trump is a troll or not depends on whether he's telling the truth -- or thinks he is at the moment it comes out of his mouth. Personally, I don't think he's a troll, his internal dysfunction is on some other existential tier. > as a way of antagonizing the virtue-signaling left. Of all the Republican candidates he was the most leftfield I'm going to assume that "leftfield" is 100% sports-jargon and in no way a veiled back-reference to "the left" politically.
    - insickness 10y ago
      Leftfield meaning unconventional, perhaps more commonly said is 'out of left field.' > Whether Trump is a troll or not depends on whether he's telling the truth Does it, though? It could equally apply to someone who feigns ignorance of the truth. For example, someone starts talking about a topic. You're an expert in the topic but disagree with his assessment. You pretend not to be an expert and ask questions. He thinks he's helping you understand while in reality you are goading him into overstating his position and proving him wrong. There may be some deception as to your level of knowledge but the underlying argument isn't necessarily untrue.
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
- transient5648 10y ago
  > 1. Trolling always means the user is, in some way, not sincere or not honest in their interactions. Unintentional trolling would contradict that.
  - Terr_ 10y ago
    > Unintentional trolling As I mentioned in the ancient link, there's no such thing, because I consider that a contradiction in terms, much like "accidental assassination" or "unperturbed terror". You only see the words together when the author is going for rhetorical effect: > No matter how moronic, argumentative, or misinformed a person might be, they cannot be a troll if they are trying to be honest and their motives are straightforward. There are many other unflattering labels you can use for the kind of person you describe, but "trolling" implies and requires intent.
bigtunacan 10y ago
Yeah; it is an interesting definition of trolling. By my own internalized definition of trolling, about 80% or more of reddit comments are trolling. By the definition in this literature virtually nothing on reddit is trolling.
mwfunk 10y ago
I always considered trolling to be an intentionally disruptive thing- posting things you may not even believe to get a rise out of people. Based on their definition, they risk lumping everyday assholery/immaturity/ignorance into it. Trolling is a lot more specific than "anything an ideally managed community would moderate out"; it's intentionally disturbing a person or community for various reasons (mostly sociopathic).
- scotty79 10y ago
  I always understood that troll “takes pleasure in upsetting others”. Also there's a spectrum from being mildly jokingly annoying to acting out all of the possible horribleness.

striking 10y ago

> A troll has been defined in multiple ways in previous literature as a person who initially pretends to be a legitimate participant but later attempts to disrupt the community[26], as someone who “intentionally disrupts online communities”[77], or “takes pleasure in upsetting others” [47], or more broadly as a person engaging in “negatively marked online behavior” [37] or that “makes trouble” for a discussion forums’ stakeholders [9]. > In this paper, similar to the latter studies, we adopt a definition of trolling that includes flaming, griefing, swearing, or personal attacks, including behavior outside the acceptable bounds defined by several community guidelines for discussion forums [22, 25, 35]. You may have missed part of the relevant section there.

Terr_ 10y ago

Yeah, I'm not sure what credence to give to "the literature" they cite. Just speaking for me personally, I was musing on it long ago [0] and I'd like to suggest three starting points: 1. Trolling always means the user is, in some way, not sincere or not honest in their interactions. 2. Trolling is always about triggering or goading victims into a reaction. 3. Trolling is not the same as humor, trolling can incorporate humor, but only in a "mean-spirited" way. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/p7u3k/troll_level_master/c3n98ia/ https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/p7u3k/troll_level_ma...

insickness 10y ago
#2 gets closest. South Park's latest season was a very insightful satire of Trump as the ultimate troll. Online trolls originally pushed Trump's candidacy as a way of antagonizing the virtue-signaling left. Of all the Republican candidates he was the most leftfield in the sense that he had no political experience and was also the least politically correct. He was brash and mean to the other candidates and seemed not to care if what he said came off as insensitive or even racist/sexist. Trump's success in the primaries triggered the left into over-reacting and running a campaign which contained far too much identity politics. Many felt the left was already overusing the racist/sexist card. Trump was easy bait to push them even further, exposing them and making them seemed like that's ALL they cared about.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- Terr_ 10y ago
  > #2 gets closest. Well, those aren't alternatives, I'm saying that "trolling" requires all three. > Trump as the ultimate troll You want to bring politics into this? Ah well, I guess people can minus-click the thread. Whether Trump is a troll or not depends on whether he's telling the truth -- or thinks he is at the moment it comes out of his mouth. Personally, I don't think he's a troll, his internal dysfunction is on some other existential tier. > as a way of antagonizing the virtue-signaling left. Of all the Republican candidates he was the most leftfield I'm going to assume that "leftfield" is 100% sports-jargon and in no way a veiled back-reference to "the left" politically.
  - insickness 10y ago
    Leftfield meaning unconventional, perhaps more commonly said is 'out of left field.' > Whether Trump is a troll or not depends on whether he's telling the truth Does it, though? It could equally apply to someone who feigns ignorance of the truth. For example, someone starts talking about a topic. You're an expert in the topic but disagree with his assessment. You pretend not to be an expert and ask questions. He thinks he's helping you understand while in reality you are goading him into overstating his position and proving him wrong. There may be some deception as to your level of knowledge but the underlying argument isn't necessarily untrue.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
transient5648 10y ago
> 1. Trolling always means the user is, in some way, not sincere or not honest in their interactions. Unintentional trolling would contradict that.
- Terr_ 10y ago
  > Unintentional trolling As I mentioned in the ancient link, there's no such thing, because I consider that a contradiction in terms, much like "accidental assassination" or "unperturbed terror". You only see the words together when the author is going for rhetorical effect: > No matter how moronic, argumentative, or misinformed a person might be, they cannot be a troll if they are trying to be honest and their motives are straightforward. There are many other unflattering labels you can use for the kind of person you describe, but "trolling" implies and requires intent.

bigtunacan 10y ago

Yeah; it is an interesting definition of trolling. By my own internalized definition of trolling, about 80% or more of reddit comments are trolling. By the definition in this literature virtually nothing on reddit is trolling.

mwfunk 10y ago

I always considered trolling to be an intentionally disruptive thing- posting things you may not even believe to get a rise out of people. Based on their definition, they risk lumping everyday assholery/immaturity/ignorance into it. Trolling is a lot more specific than "anything an ideally managed community would moderate out"; it's intentionally disturbing a person or community for various reasons (mostly sociopathic).

scotty79 10y ago
I always understood that troll “takes pleasure in upsetting others”. Also there's a spectrum from being mildly jokingly annoying to acting out all of the possible horribleness.