2 ms·
I admit my tone was flippant, but there was a point underneath. The hallmark of a troll is to mischaracterize what you're saying. You never even reach the point
by pg 17y ago
I admit my tone was flippant, but there was a point underneath. The hallmark of a troll is to mischaracterize what you're saying. You never even reach the point of disputing the matter at hand; instead you argue about what you said.
I was fooled by trolls the first couple times I encountered them, because I couldn't imagine why anyone would want to waste their time that way. From experience I learned a test for recognizing them: when I kept having to say "No, what I said was..." Now when I find myself about to say that, I just stop participating.
My point with Mr. Weaver was simply that it was remarkable how quickly he'd independently reproduced the defining quality of trolls. It was funnier without all this explanation.
- netsp 17y agoI think everyone got the allusion the first (funny?) time, before the explanation. It's still 'beneath you.' It's contributing to pulling the conversation into an uninteresting place, just like getting you talking about what you did and did not say.