![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 8 of 8. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by Deneb on July 11, 2006, at 20:14:37
In the FAQ, you provide a link to a site about trolls.
http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm#WCBD
Doesn't the article seem to over generalize and jump to conclusions about trolls? A person accused of being a troll would feel put down. Bob, you don't think that trolls are the devil incarnate, do you? :-(
You once said that trolls are people too. Do you really believe that?
Deneb*
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 12, 2006, at 18:46:11
In reply to Dr. Bob, is your link civil?, posted by Deneb on July 11, 2006, at 20:14:37
> Doesn't the article seem to over generalize and jump to conclusions about trolls?
What part of the article? And what conclusions?
Bob
Posted by Deneb on July 12, 2006, at 19:13:10
In reply to Re: is your link civil?, posted by Dr. Bob on July 12, 2006, at 18:46:11
> What part of the article? And what conclusions?
>
> Bob"Trolls are utterly impervious to criticism (constructive or otherwise). You cannot negotiate with them; you cannot cause them to feel shame or compassion; you cannot reason with them. They cannot be made to feel remorse."
What if not all trolls are impervious to criticism?
"When trolls are ignored they step up their attacks, desperately seeking the attention they crave. Their messages become more and more foul, and they post ever more of them."
Attacks? Messages become more and more foul? Would someone accused of being a troll be put down if someone called their posts attacks and foul?
Deneb* (who has been accused of being a troll several times)
Posted by james K on July 12, 2006, at 23:50:16
In reply to Re: is your link civil?, posted by Deneb on July 12, 2006, at 19:13:10
Hi Deneb, I haven't talked with you for a while. I was reading this and thought I'd just throw in the idea that a "real" troll wouldn't have the feelings. Like a the idea of being a troll is that you are there for such wrong reasons that you by definition can't be reached.
Being accused or suspected of being a troll isn't the same as being one. I think being hurt by people's responses is a sign of non-troll.
But I totally understand if you've been accused of the behavior, you might not like a negative description. You are not a troll however.
I hope I'm not misunderstanding some subtle distinction in the internet definition of the word.
james k
Posted by Deneb on July 13, 2006, at 10:57:41
In reply to Re: is your link civil? » Deneb, posted by james K on July 12, 2006, at 23:50:16
What about people who really are trolls? Don't they deserve civility? I can imagine someone being a real troll and not being upset by people being uncivil towards them, but civility isn't only for people who require it here. Regardless of whether they are affected by incivility or not, everyone should be protected.
An extreme example: If Hitler was here but he was civil and people started saying he was an evil person, that would be putting Hitler down. It doesn't matter if the statement was true and it doesn't matter if Hitler wasn't upset by the incivility.
There shouldn't be discrimination between good and bad people. Everyone should be protected.
Deneb*
Posted by james K on July 14, 2006, at 1:05:11
In reply to Re: is your link civil? » james K, posted by Deneb on July 13, 2006, at 10:57:41
That's cool. I was thinking after I posted yesterday about flaws in my thinking. I focused on the fact that I felt you were feeling accused yourself (I think you said), but forgot about the underlying idea of a troll getting adherence to the same rule structure.
I think the only answer I have that fits into my interpretation of the Psychobabble civility concept is that the word "troll" as has an internet definition is an action word identifier. Troll is a behavior, not a person. To troll makes one a troll, and a troll by the meaning of troll cant be reasoned with and can't be made to feel feelings.
Still lost in semantics and concepts but I think I'm on the right track. I do think these are relevant concepts to consider and discuss in light of the civility rules here, but not to get too wrapped up in (for myself).
Hitler is always a hard concept to deal with, but I think that if Hitler was to come here, and be himself, we would have to deal with him. But if he came here and started being "Hitleresque" (in the historical meaning of the idea) he wouldn't be around long enough to figure out what to do about him. (because of the civility rules).
Oh well, all fair questions. I've engaged in the thought process because I've learned from this in the recent past and am now in an outrageous real life civilty process that I have to survive (in real life)
thanks, James K
Posted by Dr. Bob on July 19, 2006, at 20:44:05
In reply to Re: is your link civil?, posted by Deneb on July 12, 2006, at 19:13:10
> "Trolls are utterly impervious to criticism (constructive or otherwise). ... They cannot be made to feel remorse."
Fair enough, I do think that's jumping to conclusions. I'll unlink that page. Thanks for bringing this up.
Bob
Posted by Deneb on July 19, 2006, at 21:06:28
In reply to Re: is your link civil?, posted by Dr. Bob on July 19, 2006, at 20:44:05
(((((((((((((Dr. Bob)))))))))))))))
You really do care about civility. I love you Bob.
Deneb*
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.