Well, Kasakato, the way I see it is that in the past you accused just about anybody as a troll. Ignorant or even stupid people are not trolls, simply ignorant or stupid. You'd flame them for it. Now, there really is such a thing as a troll. We've two on the boards right now (though I think they are really only one and I have reported this to the mods and I hope we log IPs here so they can find out for sure). Trolls simply start new accounts and may actually be members who post under a different name for real advice, but the rest of the time they simply use a troll ID or IDs and post assinine drivel. You can spot the difference between a troll and an otherwise normal member just arguing by the content of the troll's entire post history. Trolls most oten have low post count, only suigned up recently and have never asked a serious, polite or non-inflamatory question. The best trolls are subtle. They create a troll ID and then use it to actually post completely benign subject matter and maybe answer a question or two. They keep an eye on the board and find some of the most controversial stuff to post about. Then, they one day post about it. If it looks like the thread may be taking a turn for the bottom of the page, the troll will fan the flames. Trolls thrive on creating havoc and especially in getting unwitting acomplices to actually argue both sides for them. That is why it is always best to know the message board, its members and the controversial topics. They also like having some post count and a certain amount of respectabilty because they can rely on that to get them through the scrutiny of moderators etc. Some of the best trolls I have seen only needed one single post to start an out and out war on a messageboard. Some trolls revel in the obvious troll, however, and so they will do simply retarded things. These, most likely, have alt IDs on a board and actually use it, but just have a vendetta against one or a few people and so deliberately try to troll them. That's what we have right now.
So, anyway, I guess you are sort of reaping what you have sown by shouting troll at people who simply disagreed with you, no matter how wrong their information might have been. This is why I believe in subtlety for the most part. It's also why I believe in stating facts intermingled with personal experience and the anecdotal evidence of people in positions to be somewhat authoritative on a subject. It's one thing to say, "in my experience," but quite another to say, "in not only my experience but also for this person, that person and also Person X who happens to be a marine biologist working at San Diego's Big Honking Official Aquarium of the Gods." I also believe in sticking to facts, providing evidence after evidence to support my position. This can frustrate the ignorant and the troll alike. You are not flaming, you are only presenting facts as you see them. It's distinctly anti-troll to base an argument on fact and not emotion. It often draws out the emotions of the troll and gives them enough rope with which to hang themselves and thereby get banned from a board. Anyway, just some thoughts for Kas 2.0 to consider. Debates on the internet are not bad because this is how some people learn. Arguing on the internet is just a waste of time. To the outsider, the difference between an argument and a debate may not be so obvious, but all one has to do is distinguish between posting our emotions and posting emotional reasoning. Anyway, I hope this explains a little of at least where I come from and what I see as Kas 1.0's greatest quandry. It was never that you were wrong, only that you let emotions get the better of you. We could all do well to remember that as I think most, if not all of us here have at one point or another let emotions guide us.
)
Maybe :joe: ?
