Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

Crossposted from the Moose

Don't usually crosspost here but seeing that a "polite" diary comparing Obama to Hitler is on the Rec.List ...

... I thought I'd share this with those that don't visit us at the Motley Moose.

"University politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so small."

- Henry Kissinger

Why are people so nasty on blogs?

Why aren't some people able to have a discussion about the merits of a candidate, or strengths and weaknesses of a specific strategy without

getting personal or mean about it?

Are the stakes really so low in some parts of the blogosphere, that people feel the need to be nasty about everything?

Short answer.

Yes.

For many people, flaming and hostility are the only reasons to get online.

These are folks who suffer from a chronic case of assholicism.

Trolls.

troll    
One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the essence of the issue.

It's much easier to criticise and inflame than it is to be creative and stimulating.

This is as true for the blogosphere as it is for the real world.

Not all trolls are loud, obnoxious and obvious though.

One of my favorites subset of trolls is one that does not fit this specific criteria.

The "polite" troll. You know exactly what I'm talking about.

These are usually the ones railing against opression and all about their right to spew whatever nonsense they are peddling that day.

They usually offer up blisteringly polite, well written 'snake under the rose' posts that are perfectly within the bounds of decency, but create unrest

and dissatisfaction with cutting accuracy.

Disruptive people, who keep themselves just at the edge of acceptable behavior.

They can drive away the sane people just as much as the loud and obnoxious obvious trolls.

These are the posters all too often cry innocence and hide behind the very worthy excuse of  open discussion, but are frequently just trying to stir up

trouble.

Those are usually the ones accusing trusted and long time users of promoting censorship and trollish behavior.

I'm pretty sure some of those will turn up in the comments.

They are predictable like that.

Blogs have to walk a fine line though.

- Heavy handed mods find themselves with a dead community, because people do not want to be dictated to.

- Mods that exercise too little input also find themselves with a cobweb, because trolls come in and run people off.

This last point is the one in which I'll expand in this diary.

I came across this very interesting article.

Which tries to apply the Broken Window theory to the blogosphere.

The book is based on an article titled "Broken Windows" by James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, which appeared in the March 1982 edition of The Atlantic Monthly.[2] The title comes from the following example:

"Consider a building with a few broken windows. If the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows. Eventually, they may even break into the building, and if it's unoccupied, perhaps become squatters or light fires inside.

Or consider a sidewalk. Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates. Eventually, people even start leaving bags of trash from take-out restaurants there or breaking into cars."

A successful strategy for preventing vandalism, say the book's authors, is to fix the problems when they are small. Repair the broken windows within a short time, say, a day or a week, and the tendency is that vandals are much less likely to break more windows or do further damage. Clean up the sidewalk every day, and the tendency is for litter not to accumulate (or for the rate of littering to be much less). Problems do not escalate and thus respectable residents do not flee a neighborhood.

The theory thus makes two major claims: that further petty crime and low-level anti-social behavior will be deterred, and that major crime will, as a result, be prevented. Criticism of the theory has tended to focus only on the latter claim.

Original in The Atlantic (1982).

This was in the news again because of a recent article in The Economist in which the theory is proved correct in an experimenal setting.

A PLACE that is covered in graffiti and festooned with rubbish makes people feel uneasy. And with good reason, according to a group of researchers in the Netherlands. Kees Keizer and his colleagues at the University of Groningen deliberately created such settings as a part of a series of experiments designed to discover if signs of vandalism, litter and low-level lawbreaking could change the way people behave. They found that they could, by a lot: doubling the number who are prepared to litter and steal.

How does this theory apply to blogs you ask?

Kottke says a bit like so :

Much of the tone of discourse online is governed by the level of moderation and to what extent people are encouraged to "own" their words. When forums, message boards, and blog comment threads with more than a handful of participants are unmoderated, bad behavior follows. The appearance of one troll encourages others. Undeleted hateful or ad hominem comments are an indication that that sort of thing is allowable behavior and encourages more of the same. Those commenters who are normally respectable participants are emboldened by the uptick in bad behavior and misbehave themselves. More likely, they're discouraged from helping with the community moderation process of keeping their peers in line with social pressure. Or they stop visiting the site altogether.

Hmmm...

Unchecked comment spam signals that the owner/moderator of the forum or blog isn't paying attention, stimulating further improper conduct. Anonymity provides commenters with immunity from being associated with their speech and actions, making the whole situation worse...how does the community punish or police someone they don't know? Very quickly, the situation is out of control and your message board is the online equivalent of South Central Los Angeles in the 1980s, inhabited by roving gangs armed with hate speech, fueled by the need for attention, making things difficult for those who wish to carry on useful conversations.

I wonder if we could test this theory out.

Maybe track a blog and see how things develop over time.

Heh.

Other than the quasiracist South LA dig I agree with the author 100%.

I get a more Medieval vibe from it though.

Kind of Braveheart meets The Warriors meets 9/11 truthers thing.

We all know what the end result of a poorly moderated blog is.

But few people know their is a Law in monetary economics that can be applied to this phenomena as well.

Gresham's Law

Gresham's law says that any circulating currency consisting of both "good" and "bad" money (both forms required to be accepted at equal value under legal tender law) quickly becomes dominated by the "bad" money. This is because people spending money will hand over the "bad" coins rather than the "good" ones, keeping the "good" ones for themselves.

Gresham's Law of trolls:

Trolls are willing to use a forum with a lot of thoughtful people in it, but thoughtful people aren't willing to use a forum with a lot of trolls in it.

Which means that once trolling takes hold, it tends to become the dominant culture.

Let's not let that happen here peeps.

What do you say MyDD?

Tags: broken window, economics, fu trolls, meta, trolls (all tags)

Comments

58 Comments

fogiv said it best ....

To troll, or not to troll--that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the blog to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune
Or to take to the keyboard against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them.

Check the whole thing out.

It's hysterical.

Flame away "polite" trolls!

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 01:32PM | 0 recs
Re: fogiv said it best ....

by ellington 2008-12-09 07:54AM | 0 recs
Re: fogiv said it best ....

by ellington 2008-12-09 09:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

comment to the topic of the diarist, but not a remark to the diarist personally:

what flabbergasts me, and strikes me as such a childish waste of mind is the posters that take it upon themselves to act as hall monitors and inform everyone else that this or that poster is a 'known troll'. I really don't see where the interest or energy comes from to keep tabs on other MyDD members. I thought only Santa kept the naughty or nice list. Is it really so disturbing and disrupting to just pass over stupid 'trollish' comments, and not make a big deal about all this? As you quoted - blogs REALLY aren't that serious, so why aggressively hunt down people? Ignoring people is just as effective.

by swissffun 2008-12-07 01:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

zerosumgame.

"Your ratings abuse will be reported."

lulz!

Spare me. You can start posting with your original handle and I'll be glad to answer any questions you have. I don't do sockpuppets though.

Sorry.

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 01:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

huh? comment to me? zerosum? I've had runins with them in the past. Makes me giggle that your trolldar is so off. and reinforces my point - why waste energy on 'hunting' trolls when the risk for putting MyDD colleagues into the wrong pidgeon-hole is just so high? ;-)

by swissffun 2008-12-07 02:02PM | 0 recs
You don't really want to go there.

You want people to forget all you did was t'rate every single comment from people who disagree with your rightwing talking points for months?

You are the biggest ratings abuser I've ever seen on this site.

Comment after comment of Obama supporters t'rated.

Of course these were balanced out by mojo after mojo for zerosumgame.

Don't recall your blatant trolling?

A refresher.

Here.

FYI - Swissfun, I've reported you for abusing the ratings system.  

"Not only do I want an elite president, I want someone who's embarrassingly superior to me." -- Jon Stewart, 4/15/08
by -----------------------------------
[ Parent ]

Here.

Again with a 0 rating from swillfun. WTF? It seems you have been a ratings abuser for some time:

swissffun troll rated this post.  It is not troll rate worthy.  How long must we suffer these unnecessary troll ratings (here is another one by swissffun) before the Admins do something?  swissffun clearly doesn't know how to properly use his/her mojo abilities.  

on Wed May 28, 2008 at 06:47:35 PM EST

------------------------------------
[ Parent ]

Here.

Re: This is the fallacy in which you are indulging (none / 0)

swissfun troll rating me (or anyone) is ridiculous.

"But not me personally were those cheers for"
-------------------------------------
[ Parent ]

3 different respected users from both sides of the primary wars.

Took the names out but a quick google search is all anybody needs really.

I'm pretty sure I could fine A LOT more where these came from.

If you want honest conversation, why not start by being honest yourself?

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 02:43PM | 0 recs
Re: You don't really want to go there.

by ellington 2008-12-09 07:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

img src="http://www.positivecurfew.com/wp-co ntent/uploads/2006/12/teevee.gif">

by ellington 2008-12-09 07:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

If we "pass over" trolls, then we allow them to gain a foot hold here and then before you know people think they are legitimate commentators and not just people who want to stir up shit. Their are a number of them here now who were embraced by some here only because they claimed support for a certain candidate and were embraced by that candididates supporters here.

by venician 2008-12-08 07:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory
Spiff, while I appreciate the sentiment, and the research, I fear you are more like Don Quixote tilting at windmills, rather than a troll beset Hamlet, wondering where it all went wrong.
The people who run this blog aren't interested in moderating when a "troll" diary gets hundreds of comments.
But thank you for the effort.
by skohayes 2008-12-07 01:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

Thanks skohayes!

The diary wasn't really about MyDD. But the parallels are so obvious that I thought it woud be very hard to get anybody to believe that.

I still insist that this is a user moderated blog.

When the community starts using the ratings system and figuring out who is sincere and who is just here to stir up trouble this place can start rocking again.

But as we can see, many people would rather leave than put up with all the drama.

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 01:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

by ellington 2008-12-09 08:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

Nancy "Broken Window" Kallitechnis...  It has a nice ring to it, although "Broken Record" would perhaps be more fitting.

by thatpurplestuff 2008-12-07 01:53PM | 0 recs
lulz!

I think plain "Broken" will do.

OMG!!1!! OMG!!!!11! I MADE REC LIST!!!11! WTF!!1!

THANK YOU EVERYBODY!!!!

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: lulz!

by ellington 2008-12-09 08:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

Trolls don't really bother me.  It's the 100 comments from people trying to "run the troll off" that are impossible to wade through.

by Steve M 2008-12-07 01:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

That might of been true during the primaries.

But I see a lot more people trying to "run off the people trying to run the troll off" these days.

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 02:00PM | 0 recs
... meant to say "primary".

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 02:01PM | 0 recs
Re: ... meant to say "primary".

Now let's see what deadender is abusing the rating system:

Others have rated this comment as follows:
KnoxVow 1

by venician 2008-12-08 12:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

great framing of the relativity of to troll or hunt a troll distraction in diaries.

by swissffun 2008-12-07 02:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

this diary is just plain ironic

by swissffun 2008-12-07 02:08PM | 0 recs
Very ...

... ironic.

Thanks for being so "polite" though.

These are usually the ones railing against opression and all about their right to spew whatever nonsense they are peddling that day.

They usually offer up blisteringly polite, well written 'snake under the rose' posts that are perfectly within the bounds of decency, but create unrest

and dissatisfaction with cutting accuracy.

Disruptive people, who keep themselves just at the edge of acceptable behavior.

They can drive away the sane people just as much as the loud and obnoxious obvious trolls.

These are the posters all too often cry innocence and hide behind the very worthy excuse of  open discussion, but are frequently just trying to stir up

trouble.

Those are usually the ones accusing trusted and long time users of promoting censorship and trollish behavior.

I'm pretty sure some of those will turn up in the comments.

They are predictable like that.

Like I said.

Very predictable.

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 02:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Very ...

piece of work. really.

by swissffun 2008-12-07 03:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Very ...

yes you are z.

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 03:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Very ...

ok nancy k

by swissffun 2008-12-07 03:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Very ...

So glad you are still here swiss.Don't even waste your time with the troll.

by KnoxVow 2008-12-08 11:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Very ...

Deadenders are so funny!

by venician 2008-12-08 12:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

Obama and Hitler?

Man, I thought this stuff would have ended by now.

Are people getting ready for the 2012 primaries or something?

by Bush Bites 2008-12-07 02:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

Obama admires high-flown, inspirational speech.  This is not unusual.  Probably 1/3 to 1/2 of the population does.  What's unusual is the ability to write it.  What's even more rare is the ability to write it AND deliver it.  A few people who can/could include Anthony Robbins, MLK, Adolf Hitler, Joel Osteen, Jeremiah Wright, and Abraham Lincoln.

Good times all around.

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 02:53PM | 0 recs
So...

...the response is to get all Giuliani in here (who the broken window theory is associated with)?

I'm not sure if getting rid of the cybersqueegee people and cyberpanhandlers makes this a site worth visiting over Kos or Moose (maybe for the front pagers).

by AZphilosopher 2008-12-07 02:26PM | 0 recs
Re: So...

I was hitting it more from the "little things" prespective.

One troll is all it takes for a place to start going downhill.

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 02:46PM | 0 recs
what a....

sexy and mysterious diary.

by canadian gal 2008-12-07 03:00PM | 0 recs
Re: what a....

Only wish it was half as sexy and mysterious as your diaries.

::sigh::

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 03:13PM | 0 recs
Re: what a....

nah.  you are an auteur.  i know a spaceman diary when i read it - rec'd of course.

by canadian gal 2008-12-07 03:31PM | 0 recs
Again?!

You both are the light of our lives. Group hug.

by Hollede 2008-12-09 02:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

You need to work on your use of paragraphs.  

That said, I basically agree that a kind of "broken windows" theory applies.  Trolling dominates where thoughtful conversation is impossible.  TPM Cafe was awesome until they broke threaded discussions -- now it's hopeless, because it's not feasible to have a tangential discussion.  MyDD rocked when it was about actual issues -- now it's a joke, because one of the moderators decided to encourage trolling and general stupidity.

by username 2008-12-07 03:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

Oh, and then there's "williamandmary," the sock puppet for "usti" (who's probably a sock puppet for one of the other PUMA trolls.  I can't rate your comments, but I still have TU, motherfucker.

by username 2008-12-10 05:14AM | 0 recs
I love it.

[new] Re: Are Liberals Really Enraged? (none / 0)

Who cares about Michigan?  You guys better find other work than building cars.  Those days are over.

by lillehammer on Sun Dec 07, 2008 at 10:16:02 PM EST
[ Parent | Reply to This |   ]

Heh.

[new] Re: Palin as President :-) (2.00 / 0)

i AGREE

by lillehammer on Fri Oct 24, 2008 at 01:46:38 PM EST
[ Reply to This |   ]

Your contribution to this site.

I love it when you hate me like that.

Who else is coming to play?

by spacemanspiff 2008-12-07 06:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

I recced a few other diaries and bumped it off the list.  Such is the state of mydd that a diary can get on the list with only a few recs, or sometimes with only a single rec.  I guess the site has been having difficulty maintaining traffic without its steady diet of trolls and insanity.  Now we have to ration our trolls.

Comparisons to Hitler are so March.

by Skaje 2008-12-08 12:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

In my own utterly meaningless opinion, the best way, the only way, to effectively deal with a true troll is to completely ignore them. I know this often times runs counter-intuitive to human nature, but it is a proven fact in psychological annals that acknowledging someone demonstrating inappropriate behavior in any way, even negatively, only serves to reinforce that behavior. If everyone steadfastly chose to ignore rather than react, trolls  would soon tire of their fruitless efforts and the isolaton, robbed of a reason to continue.

by phoenixdreamz 2008-12-08 01:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

I have always enjoyed this method of pest control.

by Hollede 2008-12-09 02:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

With regard to blogs, can we be sure that putting trolls in spam actually discourages them?  Perhaps the spam bucket just keeps filling up and has to be emptied more often.  Anti-Obama and other rightwing blogs don't publish dissenting opinions.  It keeps their comments pristine but I suspect they have more hidden comments from people who disagree than displayed ones.  No way of knowing.

I liked TPM's method of dealing with Trolls during the primary.  The regular commenters formed a rating scale for troll comments. Then they had a troll-off and gave an award to the troll with the highest score.  While it didn't get rid of the trolls, it was more fun for regular commenters and less fun for the trolls.  The trolls spammed less and their comments were shorter since they were not getting the reaction they wanted.

One more comment about trolls is they were most prolific during the primary.  That's when wingnuts could pretend to be supporters of one candidate and then totally bash the other candidate and his/her supporters while claiming outrage at the treatment of themselves and their supposed candidate.  Once the primaries were over they went back to their own blogs (i.e. TD).

by GFORD 2008-12-08 04:40AM | 0 recs
Very good idea.

I liked TPM's method of dealing with Trolls during the primary.  The regular commenters formed a rating scale for troll comments. Then they had a troll-off and gave an award to the troll with the highest score.  While it didn't get rid of the trolls, it was more fun for regular commenters and less fun for the trolls.  The trolls spammed less and their comments were shorter since they were not getting the reaction they wanted.

by Hollede 2008-12-09 03:08AM | 0 recs
An interesting

theory and a very good diary.  About the best theory of why trolls exist I have seen in some time.

by fladem 2008-12-08 06:45AM | 0 recs
Windows stayed broken for months...

... last Spring.

A recent visit (I'm a masochist) to Texasdarlin's blog led me to marvel how she and a few of Alegre's kookier minions were allowed to dominate the recc'd diaries and the blog itself.

On an ostensibly Democratic blog why were a few clearly racist, GOP-leaning, nutty people allowed to dominate discourse?  More than anything, it was their free reign that allowed this blog to devolve into anarchic flame wars. As far as I can tell, it could happen again.

Are the moderators remotely embarrassed that a MyDD 'star' here during the primaries has a blog now that features glamour shots of Sarah Palin and expresses disappointment that Clarence Thomas wasn't able to somehow disqualify Obama's election?

by mikeinsf 2008-12-08 08:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

If you ignore the trolls they will go away. Breaking my own rule here, and assuming that you are interested in productive conversation, let me outline my view.

By engaging in troll hunting and posting diaries like this you are giving trolls what they need, attention. You and your compatriots are participating in and ultimately creating the phenomenon you despise.

If you are interested in reducing trolling then you should do one of two things: Ignore those posts you consider trolling, or engage in an honest debate if you are unsure about a post. Honestly engaging the argument another poster makes will either draw the person away from trollery, or they will out themselves as pure trolls in which case you may ignore them.

by souvarine 2008-12-08 09:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory

Does that apply to deadenders who come here just to complain about Obama?

by venician 2008-12-08 09:55AM | 0 recs
"engage the trolls"

Tends to be my view also, for similar reasons. Also it may result in an interesting conversation, or a good fight - both of which I enjoy.

To some extent, I think echo-chamber blogs can be less satisfying. I know I'd much rather have a heated debate at RedState than have 30 people agree with me at Kos. I might learn something at RS, or teach something. Neither would happen with 30 pats on the back.

The problem with the hypothetical RedState debate is that it won't happen, because I'd be dismissed out of hand - the primary danger in an overzealous troll strategy. So, I'd actually separate trolls into the "issue-oriented" and "emotion-oriented" variety.

Issue-oriented trolls have outrageous positions, but will argue them fairly. Their purpose is to explore or advocate a highly-original or unusual idea. I actually think these people inject vitality into a blog, and if nothing else provide a foil for vigorous debate.

Emotion-oriented trolls may or may not have outrageous positions, in either case their position is irrelevant. Their sole purpose is to express or incite emotion, and debate, reason, logic, even causality are simply obstacles to that end. These are the trolls that you can profitably ignore, indeed there is no benefit in engaging them.

by Neef 2008-12-08 10:33AM | 0 recs
Troll Theory is Broken

There's nothing worse on blogs than people who fret and pout and plot to oust perceived "trolls" based on a variety of hilariously anti-scientific methods. It reached its apex on DK of course, where apparently everybody is a troll at some point.

Talk bad about Obama? Troll.

Tell somebody to stop hunting trolls? Troll.

Dare to question? Troll.

The time spent "hunting trolls" is wasted time. Either debate or ignore. Life will progress.  

by cad 2008-12-08 11:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Troll Theory is Broken

I agree.Especially coming from spacemashit.

by KnoxVow 2008-12-08 11:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Troll Theory is Broken

Poor bitter knowvox. Been kickied offf how many sites now?  Even Taylor Marsh banned her.

by venician 2008-12-08 12:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Troll Theory is Broken

And now you're abusing the TR system:

knoxvow's User Page
Comment Ratings by KnoxVow

2) "engage the trolls" [2.00], by Neef, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/08/2008 12:33:54 PM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

3) Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory [2.00], by venician, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/08/2008 11:55:51 AM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

4) Windows stayed broken for months... [2.00], by mikeinsf, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/08/2008 10:06:41 AM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

5) Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory [2.00], by venician, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/08/2008 09:14:35 AM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

6) An interesting [2.00], by fladem, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/08/2008 08:45:27 AM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

7) Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory [2.00], by GFORD, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/08/2008 06:40:38 AM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

8) Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory [2.00], by Skaje, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/08/2008 02:35:27 AM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

9) Re: what a.... [2.00], by canadian gal, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/07/2008 05:31:52 PM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

10) Re: Trolls and the Broken Window Theory [2.00], by username, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/07/2008 05:28:38 PM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

12) Re: what a.... [1.80], by spacemanspiff, Rated: 1
Posted on 12/07/2008 05:13:17 PM PST
Rated on 12/08/2008 01:26:35 PM PST

by venician 2008-12-08 12:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Troll Theory is Broken

Huh?

by cad 2008-12-08 04:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Troll Theory is Broken

troll

lol

by ellington 2008-12-09 07:45AM | 0 recs
The windows were broken during primary

season--when Texas Darlin and Truthteller and Suzie Hu were 'punished' for their toxic racism with regular appearances on the Rec List.   Every blog gets the comments and diary section it deserves.

by Geekesque 2008-12-09 08:37AM | 0 recs
Jon Favreau

Is a troll.

The point of this comment is this.  The great myth -- and it is a myth -- that calling someone a troll is something based on the behavior of the person in question.

Not the opinion being expressed by the person in question.

It is truly a myth and can be exposed easily by showing that repetitive and disruptive comments about some things are encouraged, and repetitive and disruptive comments about other things are down rated and called trolling.

I could respect this discussion if this simple fact could be dealt with honestly.

Any behavior AT ALL is OK as long as you're saying the right things.  

I'll say that again.

Any behavior AT ALL is OK as long as you're saying the right things.  Got that???

But talk about how someone in the Obama camp screwed up and you're a troll.

This entire diary is summed up like this:  Shut up about Jon Favreau.

But remember who the real troll is.

Remember who disrupted this community by getting drunk and behaving like an asshole for the entire world to see?

Yep.  Jon Favreau.

Let's get rid of Jon so we can move on and raise the level of discussion out of the gutter in which he resides.

by iDemocrat 2008-12-09 12:46PM | 0 recs
spacemanspiff

Is a troll.

That's what i've decided.

He abuses rating priveledges and would rather make excuses for the sexist pig Jon favreau than heal the party.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

on spacemanspiffffff.

he hates women..

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

by iDemocrat 2008-12-09 11:47PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads