3 ms·

With respect to any particular objective definition of trolling, there may exist perfect snowflake comments that are not trolling but are identified as such by

With respect to any particular objective definition of trolling, there may exist perfect snowflake comments that are not trolling but are identified as such by the definition. There exist plenty of definitions that can be imagined which make the above snowflakes very rare in practice. If the beholder argument is that the existence of a single such snowflake invalidates the possibility that useful objectivity can be used to study the concept of trolling -- then the claim is ludicrous. We can study the notion of trolling without getting every single label right every time.

khedoros1 10y ago
> If the beholder argument is that the existence of a single such snowflake invalidates the possibility that useful objectivity can be used to study the concept of trolling -- then the claim is ludicrous. Agreed, but I don't think we're talking about snowflakes. I think we're talking about a significant portion of the communication out there that might be identified by some as "trolling". And I guess I'm less interested in an objective definition of trolling than I am in an objective determination of whether some particular post or group of posts is intended as a troll. On top of that, I don't think it's a binary determination. There's such a thing as a 100% troll post or a 100% innocent post, but there's also everything in between.
- breatheoften 10y ago
  I'm more interested in the side of the spectrum containing the posts that are the most clearly likely to be agreed upon as examples of trolling. It's my opinion that way too many of this variety of trolling voice (augmented by bots) has been shouting trolling messages at groups of people in a way that discourages real attempts at communication. I see this kind of messaging as a way of isolating communities from each other and blocking avenues of communication between perspectives that would otherwise evolve organically.

khedoros1 10y ago

> If the beholder argument is that the existence of a single such snowflake invalidates the possibility that useful objectivity can be used to study the concept of trolling -- then the claim is ludicrous. Agreed, but I don't think we're talking about snowflakes. I think we're talking about a significant portion of the communication out there that might be identified by some as "trolling". And I guess I'm less interested in an objective definition of trolling than I am in an objective determination of whether some particular post or group of posts is intended as a troll. On top of that, I don't think it's a binary determination. There's such a thing as a 100% troll post or a 100% innocent post, but there's also everything in between.

breatheoften 10y ago
I'm more interested in the side of the spectrum containing the posts that are the most clearly likely to be agreed upon as examples of trolling. It's my opinion that way too many of this variety of trolling voice (augmented by bots) has been shouting trolling messages at groups of people in a way that discourages real attempts at communication. I see this kind of messaging as a way of isolating communities from each other and blocking avenues of communication between perspectives that would otherwise evolve organically.