3 ms·

From the quotes in the article it looks like they're focussing on "uncivil online comments", "rudeness", "name-calling" and "pushing people’s emotional buttons,

From the quotes in the article it looks like they're focussing on "uncivil online comments", "rudeness", "name-calling" and "pushing people’s emotional buttons, through derogatory comments". That gives a reasonable picture of their definition of troll, doesn't it? And I don't think it's an unreasonable one. I don't think there's much danger of conflating the above with civil, rational debate. Not sure what you're getting at.

kintamanimatt 14y ago
They also say that "trolls take pleasure in bashing a story from every possible angle" and indicate that trolling involves leaving "negative comments", both of which could include pointing out an article's flaws, for example. Only later do they move on to these other definitions you mentioned. Their definition of trolling appears to be a moving target throughout the article and this is why I feel they're conflating actual trolling with benign criticism. In my experience, many people perceive all criticism to be rude and harsh. My definition of rude might be different to yours and what I consider to be straightforward criticism, someone else might consider to be a harsh rebuke!
- vanderZwan 14y ago
  As I interpreted the article, it boils down to having emotional buttons pushed and that blocking reasonable discourse - the intent is less important. I don't think my German friends are trolling me when they freak out at the word "nuclear" before I can even begin to describe the potential of Thorium, but it's still a problem.
  - kintamanimatt 14y ago
    That's an even looser definition of trolling though! A comment that might push my emotional buttons might wash over someone else, and vice versa. Many things, including cultural and subcultural norms, will dictate what's emotionally charged. Why do your German friends freak out at the word "nuclear"?
- Wintamute 14y ago
  We've interpreted the article differently. I think it's mainly talking about negative commenter vs. commenter interactions, not commenter vs. article criticism.

kintamanimatt 14y ago

They also say that "trolls take pleasure in bashing a story from every possible angle" and indicate that trolling involves leaving "negative comments", both of which could include pointing out an article's flaws, for example. Only later do they move on to these other definitions you mentioned. Their definition of trolling appears to be a moving target throughout the article and this is why I feel they're conflating actual trolling with benign criticism. In my experience, many people perceive all criticism to be rude and harsh. My definition of rude might be different to yours and what I consider to be straightforward criticism, someone else might consider to be a harsh rebuke!

vanderZwan 14y ago
As I interpreted the article, it boils down to having emotional buttons pushed and that blocking reasonable discourse - the intent is less important. I don't think my German friends are trolling me when they freak out at the word "nuclear" before I can even begin to describe the potential of Thorium, but it's still a problem.
- kintamanimatt 14y ago
  That's an even looser definition of trolling though! A comment that might push my emotional buttons might wash over someone else, and vice versa. Many things, including cultural and subcultural norms, will dictate what's emotionally charged. Why do your German friends freak out at the word "nuclear"?
Wintamute 14y ago
We've interpreted the article differently. I think it's mainly talking about negative commenter vs. commenter interactions, not commenter vs. article criticism.