Domain: fixedearth.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to fixedearth.com.
Comments · 44
-
Did the heliocentrism debate die?
You can't stop idiots from voicing their opinions, so there will always be "debates" on subjects that aren't really debatable. The sun revolving around the earth, atheism being a religion, or copyright infringement being theft, whatever. You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
-
Not anonymous any more.
Like other people who take your position, you appear to think that science is democratic...
THAT is complete bullshit. That is the exactly the point that I made in a preceding post... and you claim to have read this thread??? Go back and read it again. You are in error.
When asked for a peer-reviewed article, you presented a list of scientists. It doesn't really matter what you've written in any other post-- that kind of category error gives the appearance that you think science is democratic because that's the only scenario in which this wouldn't be a category error.
Most of your other complaints follow the same pattern. It's not that I haven't read your other posts, so there's no need to wait for Slashdot to get fixed. In fact, I've been reading your posts on this subject for many months now. Your recent post did include a peer-reviewed article, which is progress of sorts and I applaud you for it. (Although the objections in my previous comments still stand.) But as far as I can tell, none of your previous comments contained even a single direct link to a peer-reviewed article. It's hard to be certain when you spam dozens of links into a single post, so I may very well have missed a direct link to a legitimate journal. If that's the case, I apologize and humbly ask-- again-- that you copy the link here so I can see whatever evidence you've seen that makes you so... excitable.
Note that peer review is a necessary but not sufficient condition for establishing a valid scientific claim. Not all peer-reviewed papers are accurate, as I've shown. But if you want respect from scientists, you have to first rise above this reliance on pseudo-scientific websites that display approximately the same level of rigor and oversight as this site.
-
Re:To Anonymous Coward:
Further, I had in fact answered one of Geoffrey's posts, and I have just answered another one, at length, with a reply that indirectly references about 150 or more peer-reviewed scientific papers.
Here's proof that the Moon doesn't cause the tides, that the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, and that the Earth doesn't move. The website has more than 150 peer-reviewed references, I'm sure!
Not convinced? Why not? Do you see any difference between the post wrote in response to Geoffrey Landis and the fixedearth.com website? Because I don't. That's why we're asking you to provide us with a direct link to an actual peer-reviewed article supporting your claim that sunspots are responsible for global warming. It's all too common for pseudoscientists to quote legitimate articles to support their outlandish claims, and then ignore the scientists' complaints.
-
Re:not-so-good?
If it is wrong or bad science or whatever it needs to be discussed and and an argument needs to be made as to why it is wrong.
That's the problem. If you read just the first part of my link, you'll see that creationism isn't even wrong. Creationism isn't bad science, because that implies that it somehow qualifies as science in the first place.
There is nothing wrong with healthy debate on a topic even if you are radically opposed to your opponent. Avoiding the debate or demeaning your opponent doesn't help anyone and it doesn't advance understanding.
I agree that this subject stirs up a lot of vitriol on both sides, which is profoundly unproductive.
But the problem is that there's no genuine debate here. Creationists have been presenting the same arguments decades after they've been thoroughly debunked. That's not debate, it's a form of amnesia. It's just as valid to say that we need to teach elementary school children that the earth doesn't move.
The sad thing is, creationists are preying on your better nature. It's commendable to want to be even-handed. But sometimes certain positions are just nonsensical, and it's intellectually dishonest to tell children otherwise.
-
Re:Realization
Scientific advances have ALWAYS been political.
One need only look at the debates surrounding other ideas that have changed the status quo. Evolution vs creationism (still going on). Heliocentrism vs geocentrism (which is actually yes, still going on).
It is no different now with global climate change. The realization that what we as humans do CAN affect the earth as a whole (and in a negative way) will be fiercely opposed by crackpots even hundreds of years from now.
The fact is that it does not matter how accurately you explain something with a controversial scientific answer, there will always be crackpots and nut jobs who scream about government conspiracies or atheist cabals.
-
Re:Personally
I subscribe to the Creation theory.
And there are people who subscribe to Geocentric Theory.
However, I don't think either theory should be taught in science classes.
And they don't think the sun-centered solar system should be taught in science class either.
Science should be taught not unprovable theories. No one can prove Evolution nor can anyone prove Creation.
Sure.... lets not teach students ANY science at all.
Lets not teach the theory of gravity. Lets not teach atomic theory. Lets not teach electromagnetic theory. Lets not teach the theory of optics. Lets not teach any science at all.Lets not even teach the heliocentric theory of the solar system.
All evidence indicates that heliocentrism is the best most accurate explanation for the solar system.
All evidence indicates that evolution is the best most accurate explanation for the diversity of life on earth.All attempts to refute heliocentric theory have failed based on the evidence. All attempts to refute evolutionary theory have failed based on the evidence.
Heliocentrism makes predictions, and those predictions have been endlessly tested and confirmed.
Evolution makes predictions, and those predictions have been endlessly tested and confirmed.It is impossible to "prove" that the sun goes around the sun, just as it is impossible to "prove" evolution or anything else in science. However no one has ever come up with any remotely sane alternative that is even remotely compatible with the evidence. Every alternative ever suggested by anyone has been refuted by the evidence.
If they're to be taught in school, put it under Literature like where I learned the Mayan's version of the creation of life.
The solar system and electromagnetic theory and atomic theory and everything else should be taught in literature class?
The only problem here is that you have the idea that evolution is wrong, that some people have told you that the evidence establishing evolution does not exist, that you have the idea that evolution is not as powerfully established by the evidence as every other field of science, that you have the idea that evolution is not actually a field of science just like every other field of science. Those things are all wrong.
If you want to study science, great! There are entire libraries filled with evidence "proving" evolution is true. If you have any interest in learning science, in learning what evolution actually says and how it works and learning what sort of evidence there really is to back it up, great! I'd be more than happy to help, if you have an honest interest in the science and evidence.
If you don't know any of the science, and you have no interest in learning the science, then I suggest you listen to actual mainstream professional scientists who are experts on the subject. And actual mainstream professional scientists who are experts on evolution unanimously say that evolution is fundamentally right and that it is overwhelmingly established based on all known evidence from every conceivable direction.
And I suggest you stop listening to non-scientific activist groups running public relations campaigns pushing misinformation that there's no evidence smoking causes cancer, or pushing misinformation that there's no evidence supporting evolution. The anti-evolution activists are nothing more than public relations campaigns spewing factually false information.
It is easy to convince someone that evolution is right - - - IF they are at all reasonable and rational and willing to honestly consider the evidence. If you want to take me up on that claim, please first indicate if you are a Young Earth Creationist. It is much faster and easier to address the age of the earth, much faster and easier to establish if you are willing to honestly consider the evidence in reasonable rational manner.
-
-
Re:Well-rounded?
Psalm 104(5) : "God who laid the foundations of the Earth, that it should not be removed for ever"
1st Chronicles 16(30): "Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved."
Joshua 10(12)
:"And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies."True, you have to take it as literally as possible to think this means 'heliocentrism = evil.' But somebody out there is...
Really? I think the book Romans is in the New Testament (I might have to dig out a bible to check). Romans 1:27 says
It's in the new testament, but it's not in the gospels. The gospels are questionable enough... they're third or fourth-hand accounts of what Christ said. But the rest of the new testament is a bunch of various pieces of correspondence from early Christians... and Paul wasn't included among those whose words 'would be held true in heaven, as on earth...'
And, yes, the 'pork=evil' thing is facetious.
-
Re:Sounds fine to me
against teaching both sides of the argument to school kids
The Creationists completely lost on the science, they completely lost in the courtroom, so now they are resorting to fighting a public relations disinformation campaign and trying to lobby and fight their battle in the political arena.
"Teach the Controversy!"
Except scientifically, there is no actual controversy. The basics of evolution are about as controversial as nuclear fusion.
NO, you do not "teach both sides" in a highschool science class.
And you don't do it for the exact same reason we don't "tech both sides" of the solar system controversy. There are a microscopic number of crackpots who dispute the solar system theory and insist on the sun going around a Biblical nonmoving earth, but that does not constitute a genuine scientific controversy.
Among approximately 480,000 people with degrees in any field of earth and life sciences in the US, approximately 700 give any credence to Creation Science and this anti-evolution stuff.
No, you do not give equal time to a completely invalidated position and completely refuted arguments being pushed by the 0.15% crackpots. Just as we do not teach the invalid anti-nuclear fusion arguments pushed by the Electric Universe people insisting the sun is powered by electricity.
The purpose of highschool science class is to present students with a basic overview of the major fields of science as understood and practiced by the actual professional experts in those fields. And in biology, and among biology PhDs and various biology professionals, that means evolution. Actual scientists in the relevant fields agree effectively unanimously that evolution is massively supported and documented by the evidence and that it is the very foundation required for any education and understanding in biology and most of the earth sciences.
Just because there is a PR campaign claiming a controversy doesn't mean there actually is any genuine scientific controversy beyond the inevitable 1-in-685 crackpot level you find in ANY field. All of the doubts and challenges to evolution have been endlessly checked and answered by the experts and professionals in all the field and all surrounding fields.
The only way you can legitimately "tech the controversy" in a highschool biology class is to run down a list of anti-evolution arguments repeatedly saying "this argument had been proven wrong and here's why". Which, to be honest, is actually not a bad way to teach evolution and to cover all of the science proving it. Each such attack on evolution implicitly presents an excellent pro-science opportunity to teach how and why the attack is invalid or otherwise falls down.
- -
Re:Sounds fine to me
It seems like these arguments keep coming back to the fact that our current understanding of evolution isn't perfect.
No.
These arguments keep coming back to one side who simply want science to be taught, an another side who want to single out one particular field of science which they don't like, and want science teachers to teach kids nonsense "holes" and "doubts" in the solar system theory and "alternate arguments" that maybe the earth doesn't move and maybe God put the sun in orbit around a motionless earth.
I don't see a problem with pointing out the flaws in our current understanding of evolution in a classroom setting.
Sure, as long as you are not proposing that evolution be singled out and treated any differently than the solar system and chemistry and every other field of science.
Just because there are ill informed fanatics running around saying there is a lack of evidence backing up evolution,
just because there are ill informed fanatics running around saying there are holes potentially invalidating evolution,
just because there are ill informed fanatics running around saying there is any scientific doubt at all over the basics of evolution,
doesn't mean any of that is true.
there are still huge gaps
All of science has areas we haven't figured out yet.
We teach highschool students and overview of the parts we HAVE figured out.
If a teacher wants to help inform students on the scientific processes and he discusses some of the questions and problems we currently have with GRAVITY, great! There are a number of interesting difficulties with gravity and discussing the limits of our knowledge in some field can indeed be a good way to get students interested in understanding the field of science being taught. Teaching some of the limits of our evolutionary knowledge and teaching some of areas of research within evolution could indeed be good vehicles for helping students understand evolution and helping students understand understand how and why there is no doubt over the basic fact of evolution.
However if some ill informed activist wants to use "questions and problems" of gravity as some excuse to UNDERMINE LEGITIMATE SCIENCE and they want students to think gravity is wrong and they want students to think the solar system is wrong and they want students to think that the sun orbits a Biblical unmoving earth, NO.
Evolution should be taught essentially the same way chemistry is taught.
There is NO legitimate scientific doubt about the basics in either field.
Science is all about finding answers, then taking a step back and challenging those answers.
Asking questions is great. Constantly challenging science is great.
No NO, you do not turn a highschool science class into a disinformation platform trying to undermine the solar system theory or evolutionary theory.
Students should learn that all science is "the best current understanding" and that any area of science may be revised with the discovery of new evidence and understanding. But NO, it is NOT tolerable to permit that to become and excuse or a cover to undermine some particular field of science that certain people dislike.
Putting WARNING stickers in textbooks saying "evolution is a theory" is not legitimate and it not permissable unless the exact same stickers are placed in chemistry and astronomy textbooks "warning" about atom theory and gravity theory.
- -
Re:When did science become religion?
When were we told that we cannot question assumptions made as part of scientific theory
Never.
It is indeed entirely acceptable to question ANY aspect of science.
HOWEVER
However if you don't know what you're talking about and you are horribly misinformed and you make ridiculously false statements and you insist the entire scientific community is blind and stupid and in on some gigantic conspiracy to turn your children gay, you are going to be laughed at and you are going to be insulted.
That is true if you are a chemistry denialist.
That is true if you are a moon landing denialist.
And of course that is true if you are an evolution denialist.
I have had discussions with a great many people on evolution.
Without exception people who ask a question regarding evolution fall into one of two categories:
(1) There are people who have an honest question and an honest interest in the answer. People who were taught little-to-nothing about evolution by a lousy highschool science curriculum.
(2) There are people who do not actually question evolution... they do NOT ask genuine questions. They do not like evolution, they do not want evolution explained to them, they do not WANT to understand evolution. They actively want NOT to understand evolution. They do not ask genuine questions, they just throw out random challenges to evolution that they assume/expect to knock evolution down, they critical point being that they do not care about any answer to their non-question. They either ignore the answer or they do not care that their challenge was answered and they simply fling more crap non-questions assuming and wanting something to eventually stick, and they do not care that their challenges were proven wrong time after time after time.
The people in category (1), when their question is answered and more information is supplied, their reaction is inevitable some form of "Wow, I didn't know all that stuff was out there" and progress to the evolution side is incredibly fast and complete.
People in category (2), well fanatics who are willfully blind, it is generally impossible to make any progress at all. And it doesn't matter if it's evolution or the solar system. A willfully blind fanatic has no honest questions, and a willfully blind fanatic will never be persuaded by any answer or any fact of reality.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with questioning evolution.... if you are in category 1. And if you are in category 1, then it is easy to demonstrate evolution is just just like chemistry or any other field of science.
- -
Re:When did science become religion?
When were we told that we cannot question assumptions made as part of scientific theory
Never.
It is indeed entirely acceptable to question ANY aspect of science.
HOWEVER
However if you don't know what you're talking about and you are horribly misinformed and you make ridiculously false statements and you insist the entire scientific community is blind and stupid and in on some gigantic conspiracy to turn your children gay, you are going to be laughed at and you are going to be insulted.
That is true if you are a chemistry denialist.
That is true if you are a moon landing denialist.
And of course that is true if you are an evolution denialist.
I have had discussions with a great many people on evolution.
Without exception people who ask a question regarding evolution fall into one of two categories:
(1) There are people who have an honest question and an honest interest in the answer. People who were taught little-to-nothing about evolution by a lousy highschool science curriculum.
(2) There are people who do not actually question evolution... they do NOT ask genuine questions. They do not like evolution, they do not want evolution explained to them, they do not WANT to understand evolution. They actively want NOT to understand evolution. They do not ask genuine questions, they just throw out random challenges to evolution that they assume/expect to knock evolution down, they critical point being that they do not care about any answer to their non-question. They either ignore the answer or they do not care that their challenge was answered and they simply fling more crap non-questions assuming and wanting something to eventually stick, and they do not care that their challenges were proven wrong time after time after time.
The people in category (1), when their question is answered and more information is supplied, their reaction is inevitable some form of "Wow, I didn't know all that stuff was out there" and progress to the evolution side is incredibly fast and complete.
People in category (2), well fanatics who are willfully blind, it is generally impossible to make any progress at all. And it doesn't matter if it's evolution or the solar system. A willfully blind fanatic has no honest questions, and a willfully blind fanatic will never be persuaded by any answer or any fact of reality.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with questioning evolution.... if you are in category 1. And if you are in category 1, then it is easy to demonstrate evolution is just just like chemistry or any other field of science.
- -
Re:ATTENTION CREATIONISTS!!!
Thanks for a much more thoughtful reply than average for this thread.
Right back at ya.
Sadly I can't give your reply all the time it deserves, because I've chosen to reply to quite a few already, as well as having my original post modded up to Interesting+4 and then back down to hell by angry mods.
For what it's worth, I'd have modded you +1 interesting had I not posted.
Well, that's part of the problem with attempting to falsify evolution. What was once a valid objection becomes invalid because the target moves.
Evolution in particular, or science in general?
Before we knew how much dust was actually on the moon, for example, long-age theory made "lots" the obvious prediction. Now that we know how much dust there is on the moon, we have a post hoc explanation for it in terms of long ages.
First of all, I'm not sure that obvious prediction was "lots". After reading these two pages, it looks like there was just one guy (Pettersson) providing data that implied a large amount of dust. He did so by making a number of bad assumptions, such as the assumption that any nickel in the air must be coming from meteors.
Secondly, your "post hoc explanation" sound bite gives the impression that scientists looked at the amount of dust on the moon and fudged the numbers to make it fit. The actual process involved measuring meteorite impact rates using satellites above earth's atmosphere to avoid earthly contamination, which resulted in an estimate 1000x less than Pettersson's. This estimate was then subjected to an independent cross-check by comparing them to average amounts of meteorite dust found in sedimentary rock, and they agreed.
If you want anti-evolutionists to keep up with all the latest developments, give them funding specifically to find flaws in the latest pro-evolutionary findings.
What's special about the field of evolution that makes the usual scientific process break down? Every other field of science follows the same basic process: researchers present evidence which is then checked for accuracy by their peers. What is it, specifically, about evolution that requires tacking a separate step onto the process of peer review? Why not give that (limited) funding to people who have problems with modern medicine or plasma physics or heliocentricity? Before you answer, note that I don't really see a qualitative difference between most creationists and the arguments presented at these sites (especially the heliocentricity site). Is there a difference, other than the fact that you believe one rather than the other? (I'm crossing my fingers hoping you're not a geocentrist.)
This objection irks me. It seems that the people who accuse Behe of arguing from ignorance provide refutations in the form of arguments from credulity. Behe points out complex systems and says "remove any one piece and the system breaks." His opponents respond, "so it happened some other way." Where does the onus lie?
...His opponents are already persuaded that "naturally" is the only way anything forms, so they give a just-so story about how it might possibly have happened, and consider the case closed.
Behe is making an extraordinary claim, namely that the evolution of a specific structure (take your pick from his examples) will never, repeat NEVER, be explained in full detail. Furthermore, he's arguing that this (predicted) failure isn't evidence for our collective stupidity. No, instead he jumps to the conclusion that this (again, predicted) fai
-
Re: No humsn has a right to think wrong!
speaking as someone who *has* perused that wonderful piece of internet real estate, i can say quite confidently that the *only* thing that his 'theories' predict is that his 'theories' are important for predicting things. apparently his theories can be used to figure out how to cure cancer and stop violence too, but in his self acknowledged infinite wisdom he hasn't deemed it appropriate to tell us how yet. still, its fun for a laugh for a while
:)
for those who are still interested in such things, another site: fixedearth.com is similar, although it seems this guy has at least *tried* to do some research. -
Re:In unrelated news...Scientific theories are unseated when a better explanation of the facts comes along, one that is better at predicting outcomes and so on. I think skeptics vastly underestimate the size of the mountain of evidence supporting evolution, and vastly overestimate the validity of the claims made by creationist, ID, or Fixed Earth type sites.
That being said, your argument is a common one. The problem is that the evidence we have supports evolutionary theory, the counterclaims made by evolution skeptics (the bombadier beetle, and so on) were answered years or even decades ago. If other evidence came up, scientists would look at it. Evolutionary theory is constantly being revised, in that we are learning more about sexual selection, types of speciation, rates of change, and so on--it's quite an interesting field, even to a layman.
Then you have a lot of noise from the predominantly (though not exclusively) religiously-motivated community who say that evolution isn't really science because common descent and so on isn't being challenged in the science journals. Even Behe, the ID bigwig, accepts common descent, because the evidence is so overwhelming. What skeptics want is a complete grounds-up reappraisal of common descent, natural selection, and so on, in spite of the fact that no data calls those things into question.
The religious "skeptics" will never accept evolution, and for that matter will never accept methodological materialism, because they want their bible-based explanation taught as science. So much of the "skepticism" is just a PR campaign, as per the well-known Wedge Strategy.
-
Where do you live, btellier?If you're from New York, I can understand how you can somehow ignore the rise of the Christian Right in American politics ever since the Reagan era. You need to get out and see the "Heartland" of the country. Try Dallas, or Oklahoma City, or Baton Rouge, or Jackson. How about that Crystal Cathedral in California?
We now have a President who is "Born Again", and recognizes Christ as his personal saviour. His old Attorney General, John Ashcroft, a devout Assemblies of God member, used to anoint himself with oil. We have many members of Congress, both in the Senate and the House, who are ordained ministers in their churches. Some are LDS Bishops. I would venture to say that the percentage of devout Christians holding office in various levels of government in the US exceeds that of the general population. Which oath do they hold to? Their duty to country, or to a church?
You've got people who firmly believe that the US Constitution states that the USA is a Christian nation. I've got in-laws who used to believe that I was damned to Hell because I was raised Catholic and not a member of the Church of Christ.
We have a member of the Texas House who firmly believes that the Earth is the center of the Universe, and that we never landed a man on the moon, and that satellites are held in orbit by magnetism, not gravity - because Newton's Laws are wrong and he can prove it. http://www.fixedearth.com/geosynchronous_sa.htm (I had to post that link because it's a hoot. His proof is that a LaGrange point is where gravity stops because it's where it balances out. Give the man a Nobel!)
We had an Army General (2 star?) who fervently believed we would win in Iraq because his God is greater than their God, Allah. Someone forgot to tell him they're one and the same. Jehovah, too.
These are the people who've been running this nation for the last dozen years or so. Their's are the people who backed a "Crusade" in the Middle East, thinking we'd set them "free".
Oh. And that CUNY study? Does it take into account that many black Southern Baptists are becoming Muslims? And the biggest immigrant groups in the US today are Hispanic Catholics (and Protestants) and Muslims from the Middle East and SE Asia?
Just because the percentage of people identifying themselves as Christians has gone down (how accurate is that study) does not mean that the number of people who identify themselves as religious has gone down. Or that the percentage who identify themselves as Born Again has gone down.
I don't need to cite references. All you need to do is get out of your ivory tower (sorry, that actually sounds religious!) and look around. Wake up. You're missing an entire country out there!
-
Re: Speed Found to be Key to Galaxy Formation
And by info, you mean long discredited quack theories right? The electric universe theory which the site you linked to is widely dismissed by most physicists. It does however excite these people.
-
Re:Translation:All right, so this may be the joke flying over my head, but since when did the Sun orbit the Earth?
Well according to this guy it always has... and your just part of the Zionist conspiricy to cover up the fact.
For extra giggles Warren Chisum recently circulated a letter supporting the site (Page One & Two (He says he sent it out without reading it or following the links )
-
Re:More likely
Coincidentally, there is a congressman in Texas who is arguing against the Copernican Solar System on religious grounds.
I used to defend religion, but I'm frankly tired of it and I'm not going to shrug and smile when someone spouts off some ridiculous crap. -
Re:When will the denials stop?
There is no global warming. And even if there were, there's no proof humans are causing it. The liberal press is full of wingnuts.
This much is fairly uncontroversial. We have these wild claims by left-wing atheist scientists, using all their fancy statistics (aka lies) and evolutionary confabulations, versus the authority of scripture. Not much of competition really. We know the LORD GOD alone decides if the world gets flooded or if it perishes in a firestorm. Despite this these scientists insist they have a temperature record going back 100,000 years (guess no-on bothered to tell them the world wasn't even around for the first 94,000 of those years!) and what's more they make the ridiculous claim that by burning coal and oil humans are changing the climate. This despite the axiomatic facts that humans can't change climate, only the LORD GOD can. Also we know that God created oil for us to burn, how else did it get there?
And I know for a fact that the earth is flat and has been since god created it 6000 years ago.
Yet here you forget the important (and scripturally established) point that not only is the earth flat (and that it was created somewhere around 4000BC), but that it is motionless and that it sits at the center of the universe. Much effort has been spent on fighting the evil doctrine of Evolution. But now that most people know Evolution is a lie, we need to educate the public as to the true nature of the Earth. The Bible tells us its approximate age, the fact that it is flat, the fact that it is motionless and the fact that the heavens revolve around it and not the other way around. Scientitsts have got ALL of these points wrong, no wonder they make ridiculous theories like man-made global warming. Then they misunderstand portents like melting glaciers (which clearly are a warning from God to stop out sinful ways), as being the product of their phantastic theories. It's amazing how easily some people are deceived by Satan.
-
The Bible Proves Copurnicus was Wrong!
Certainly! Here's what the "bible experts" have to say: Copurnicus was wrong!
NASA's AGENDA: Promoting Copernicanism & Evolutionism
NASA has a spiritual agenda. Yes, spiritual. It projects the image of cutting edge science opening exciting space frontiers for the good of mankind, but the facts say otherwise. Judge for yourself:
On the Space Administration's Web Page we read: "NASA's ORIGINS PROGRAM will search for clues to help us find our cosmic roots."
"Cosmic roots...?? Origins...???
There are two major beliefs about the origin of mankind and all other life forms. One says God created man and everything else not very long ago. The Bible states this view over 100 times and allows for no other explanation. God created everything fully formed as part of an eternal plan, the Bible teaches. Period. The other belief says everything came to be as it is accidentally and randomly as the result of natural forces acting upon themselves and "evolving" over billions of years. Clearly, the evolutionary belief is anti-Bible, but--more to the point about NASA's goals being spiritual--it is a belief that attributes miraculous powers of creation of all that exists to a "force" or a god known as "matter" (and "gases"). Matter did it all. All hail "matter"! No God who demands recognition and accountability is needed! With "matter" as creator we can do what we want ('cause nothing matters...).
As might be expected, a compromise belief has arisen out of these two opposites. It is called "theistic evolutionism". This view acknowledges that there has to be a God to explain the mind-blowing design that exists any which way we turn. But, says the Theistic Evolutionist, this God did not create everything fully formed but used an evolutionary process over billions of years to do the job. This evolution-dependent compromise allows a Creator God of sorts, but does not allow the Omniscient and Omnipotent Creator God Who authored the Bible. (Of note too is the fact that the Moslem Koran makes no compromise with evolution either....).
Therefore, NASA's stated goal of searching space for clues to man's origins reveals the premise behind their taxpayer supported Origins Program. That premise is that evolution is true and the Bible (along with the Koran) is false. This premise is not secular; it is spiritual. It claims to be scientific and therefore independent of religion. It is not scientific, as we shall see. It is religious, as we shall also see. The evolutionary premise violates all known science and logic. It does not have the first piece of verifiable evidence to support the squirrely evolution myth it calls "scientific". Evolutionism embodies a single spiritual agenda, viz., disqualify and replace the Bible as the source of Truth.
In support of its Origins Program, NASA says it will answer such questions as:
"Are there any planets outside our solar system that are capable of supporting life?"
"How did life originate on earth?"
"Is there life (however primitive or evolved) outside our solar system?"
Under the heading "ORIGINS SCIENCE" we see that NASA makes it plain that its goal of establishing extraterrestrial evolutionism is symbiotically connected to its dependency on another "scientific" hypothesis. Note this connection and the dependency upon the unproven Big Bang hypothesis that NASA is using to achieve its goal of establishing evolutionism as a "fact". From part of its Web Page we read:
"NASA's ORIGINS PROGRAM follows the 15-billion year long chain of events from the birth of the Universe at the Big Bang, through the formation of the chemical elements, galaxies, stars, and planets, through the mixing of chemicals and energy that cradles life on Earth, to the earliest self-replicating organisms and the profusion of life."
Seen in this statement is the unmistakable dependency of NASA's evolutionary agenda upon the Big Bang Myth.
-
Copernicus was wrong! The Bible was right!
According to the powerful chairman of the Texas House Appropriations Committee, Warren Chisum:
The non-moving Earth & anti-evolution web page of The Fair Education Foundation, Inc.
Exposing the False Science Idol of Evolutionism, and Proving the Truthfulness of the Bible from Creation to Heaven...
Levitating Globe
"An electromagnet and computerized sensor hidden in its display stand cause the Earth to levitate motionlessly in the air."
Could God have engineered something like that for the real Earth?
The Bible and all real evidence confirms that this is precisely what He did, and indeed:
The Earth is not rotating...nor is it going around the sun.
The universe is not one ten trillionth the size we are told.
Today's cosmology fulfills an anti-Bible religious plan disguised as "science".
The whole scheme from Copernicanism to Big Bangism is a factless lie.
Those lies have planted the Truth-killing virus of evolutionism in every aspect of man's "knowledge" about the Universe, the
Earth, and Himself.
Take your time.
Check it all out.
Decide for yourself.
The Non-Moving Earth & Anti-Evolution Web Page
2006
All of the evidence that is required to expose and destroy the counterfeit Copernican Model of a rotating and orbiting Earth--and the entire evolutionary paradigm resting upon that counterfeit--is set out in this book (HERE) & in scores of links on this web page.
Those who read some or all of these links will quickly realize that this is no idle claim. Rather--as will become evident with each subject listed--there is abundant hard proof that both the Copernican Counterfeit and the Big Bang Evolutionary Paradigm that is built upon it are factless frauds from start to finish.
Indeed, the diligent reader will be astonished at the level of demonstrable hi-tech fraud, baseless assumptions, occult mathematics, etc.,--all part of a religious conspiracy!--that has been at work over many centuries implanting the incredible evolution myth about the origin of the Universe, the Earth, and Mankind.
On this web page the Bible is not used to prove anything scientific. Instead, the scientific facts--along with historical and religious facts-- prove the Bible to be precisely what it claims to be, namely, the infallible Word of God.
Those who like what they read here--and are eager for more evidence in book form--will want to go HERE & HERE, and then: HERE, & HERE, and also: HERE to order The Earth Is Not Moving, The Truth About Evolution, and any of a dozen other book-length studies on Bible Doctrines.
***N E W! PayPal, MC/Visa now available on order links above....***
So, welcome! Think of this as a "crash course" for people everywhere of all ages who are ready to learn how evolutionary mythology has deceived the world...and what it will mean to every living person when that deception is exposed.
Sincerely,
(Marshall Hall, BS. MA + 2 years:...Advanced International Studies Ph.D. Program)
-
the answer is obviousWhy do you need to know science and the scientific method when we have Intelligent Design and the Bible? All the answers are there.
Plus, you know, the Universe revolves around the Earth. Even the Sun Herald says so.
That's why we don't need science. Especially in Kansas.
DT (with tongue firmly planted in cheek)
-
Re:Next up on Slashdot:
Oh, really? http://www.fixedearth.com/
(Yes, this nutcase is serious. I have a copy of his book, though I don't know why.) -
Typical anti-Christian agenda
-
Some handy links debunking this crap
http://www.fixedearth.com/electric.html
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/mccanney/inde x.html
Yeah, these people are total crackpots -
Re:OMGOMGOMG
> they can be used [to]
...
More to the point, they can be used to kill politicians (http://www.fixedearth.com/hlsm.html)
when they commit atrocities (http://www.law.indiana.edu/uslawdocs/declaration. html)
in order to halt that injustice. -
BS?
I admit, I'm a materials guy, not an astrophysicist, but I found it odd that I'd never heard of this "electric universe" model, and the best reference the submittor could find was from "thunderbolt.info". I decided to google for it, and the first link that came up was this gem, which links the electric universe to geocentric, anti-evolutionary, creationist crap. I can't find a single reputable source describing this so-called theory, just a bunch of crackpot websites. I call bullshit.
-
The Mars Rover is a HOAX!
The Federal Government's Secularization Police are brainwashing Christians into believing Copernican lies! There is ample scientific evidence for the Inerrant Biblical Universe. The Christian Bible (and the Koran!) declare the earth to be motionless. The mathematical Copernican model says the earth rotates on an "axis" (at over 1000 MPH) orbits the sun (at 30 times rifle bullet speed), and is whooshing around a galaxy (at 250 times rifle bullet speed)
.....all at the same time.
Over the centuries, superstars in the physical sciences established the Copernican model as an unchallenged fact. This success paved the way for conquest of the biological sciences (Darwin et al). This transvaluation of values and philosophy (Nietzsche et al) then quickly spread to the social and behavioral sciences (Marx, Freud et al), to mathematics (Einstein et al), the Arts (Picasso et al), Education (Dewey et al), and so on through today's media reinforcement of all of the above. ..As the 21st Century gets its feet wet, man's "knowledge" is almost totally secularized and the Bible all but ignored as the source of absolute Truth from God Himself. ..The "sciences" reign supreme, and they do so because of the victory of Copernicanism over the Bible's motionless earth.
-
Actually, BOTH Forbes AND ReutersForbes should be responsible enough to dig a little deeper into news, and not presumably blindly link to articles without verifying correctness or content. Reuters isn't the only news source available on Earth. Forbes could have done a little further checking to obtain and link to an article that is a little more complete and correct and that doesn't help further spread FUD.
It's like if I had a news site and linked to some bozo crap like this.
-
slashdot troll faq (posted by AnimeFreak)The
/. troll HOWTO
This is version 0.6 of a troll HOWTO, sort of a companion piece to jsm's excellent troll FAQ. As a draft, comments and criticism are always welcome, if not appreciated
:)
Section 1 - Trolling techniques
There are techniques used by successful trolls to elicit the maximum amount of responses from unthinking
/.ers. This section is dedicated to explaining how to use these in the course of your trolls. Remember though, a great troll can break any or all of these and still be successful...
- Timing
Because you're posting as an AC, your troll will generally be ignored in favour of posters using their accounts, and so getting in early is essential. A good guideline is to get into the first 20 posts, so that people reading the article will see the troll before it is swamped out. One way of increasing the speed with which you get your troll into play is to prepare them beforehand, and then quickly customise them for the current article. This is easier than it sounds since
/. typically repeats stories with small variations and runs lots of similar stories.
Note that this is why Jon Katz stories are pretty worthless as trolling material - by the time you've found the article and prepared a troll there's already 50+ posts on it, most of them flaming Jon Katz anyway
:)
- Exposure
Once you've got your troll in, you need people to actually read it. You also want replies -
/.ers are more likely to read your troll if it starts a large thread. You also want to remember that some people have set their comment thresholds to values higher than 0 - to get the attention of these you either want to get your post moderated up (see Style, below) or get a reply which gets moderated up to 4 or 5, in which case your troll becomes visible to all.
- Accounts
An alternative to the time-honoured tradition of AC trolling is that of creating a "troll" account. This gives you the advantage of posting at 1 rather than 0, and slashbots are more likely to take you seriously, especially if you at least sound reasonable. If you do this, try to avoid posting stuff where it is obvious you're a troll under the account - post it anoymously instead - some slightly more canny readers actually check your user info before they reply. Not many though
:)
The ultimate goal of the troll account is to secure the +1 bonus, which is currently received once you hit 26 points of Karma. To get there, employ the techniques of karma whoring that we see every day on
/. and watch the karma roll in. And of course once you get the +1 bonus, the world is your oyster in terms of /. Posts made at a default of 2 hit even those people with the threshold of 2, are more likely to get moderated up even further if they are at all coherent, and people tend to lose their critical thinking abilities in the face of the +1 bonus. Milk it for all it's worth.
- Layout
To get people reading it a troll needs to be easily readable. Make sure you break it down into easily digestible paragraphs, use HTML tags where appropriate (but always make sure you close them properly) and use whitespace appropriately.
- Size
Generally a troll shouldn't be too short, otherwise it'll get lost in the crowd. A workable minimum is a couple of medium paragraphs. Conversely, it shouldn't be too long, or no-one will bother to read it. Keep it to a happy medium.
- Spelling
Whilst spelling is important if you want the troll to be taken "seriously", key spelling mistakes can draw out the spelling zealots, especially if you mis-spell the name of a venerated
/. hero, like Linus Torveldes or Richard Strawlman (thanks dmg). Related to this is the use of the wrong word, explaining an acronym as being something it isn't or making a word into an acronym even when it isn't.
- Subject
The subject line needs to draw attention to your post without making it obvious that it is a troll. A simple statement of the main point of your argument can work here.
- Style
Once you realise that most moderators don't bother to read past the first paragraph or two, you can use this fact to craft trolls that can be moderated up as "Insightful" (note that I mean this in the
/. sense rather than the real-world sense). Start off fairly reasonable, making statements that are /. friendly and not being too controversial. As the troll goes on, make it more and more controversial, building it up for the coup de grace in the final paragraph.
- Linking
As we all know, a post with links is considered "informative" by the
/. crowd. Moderators love it, and they rarely check the links, so be sure to include as many as possible. And make them wrong - a link to the Perl website should instead point to the Python website instead, and vice versa. The other alternative to incorrect links is "useful" links to places like www.linux.org and www.microsoft.com i.e. places /.ers could never have found on their own :)
- Feeding
The ideal troll requires no feeding - it runs on its own, generating flamewars between clueless
/.ers for your amusement. But often a troll requires some help and so you should consider feeding it. Feeding is best reserved for people making either completely clueless responses, people making responses with holes in, or those wonderful people who write a 2000-word point-by-point rebuttal of your troll.
- Know your audience
Always keep in mind the kind of things advocated on
/. so that you can play on and against them. This is why anti-Linux, creationist, gun-loving, pro-corporation trolls work well - the vast majority of /.ers hold the opposite viewpoints. And if a few people agree with you, so much the better - it merely validates your viewpoint in the eyes of readers.
- Arrogance
Be arrogant. You, as a troll, know that you're right. No other explanation could exist. The wronger the "fact", the more assertively you should state it. Make it clear that you are better than everyone else - you know the truth and they are just too stupid to realise it. Use plenty of sarcasm, and use "quotes" to show it to people too dumb to realise.
- Offensiveness
Being offensive in your initial troll can be counter-productive - it causes moderators to mark you down as flamebait in general. But if you're feeding, then you can get away with calling
/.ers all kinds of things. Make broad generalisations
about /. readers - call them "long-haired Linux zealots", "socialist open-source bigots" or whatever. Stereotyping is encouraged - people always want to think that they're an individual, and will point this out to you given half a chance.
- Indifference
Great for articles with a political or social bent, this kind of troll expresses complete indifference to the topic at hand, wondering who on Earth cares about it. An alternative method is to say that the topic only concerns a certain group of people - criminals, idiots, hackers (always use this instead of crackers) or whatever group you want to offend.
- Sympathy
Appear to take the same stance as the people you're trying to troll - claim you're as much a fan of Linux as the next man, but... This way you can make all kinds of claims in the sure knowledge that you actually know what you're talking about. A great phrase to use here is "In my experience". Remember to act like all the things you're pointing out are unfortunate but true.
- The common touch
Always accuse
/.ers of being elitist. This is an easy thing to do seeing as a lot of them are. Claim that is their grandmother couldn't use it, then they are just into it to feel better than Joe Sixpack rather than "doing it for the average user". This is always great for working into anti-Linux trolls - attack command-line tools and poorly designed desktops.
- The 31337 touch
The opposite of the above. Claim that technology or whatever is only for the elite of society and that any attempt to open it up for everyone is wrong, an attack on intellectualism and possibly even dangerous. If people were meant to
understand these things then they would, and it's their fault if they're too stupid to learn.
- Contradiction
Never be afraid to contradict yourself, even in the space of a single sentence. The phrases "I am a top programmer who codes in VB" or "I am a supporter of open source who uses NT at work and 95 at home" will be sure to get a response from some weenie smugly pointing out the contradiction. Confuse the issue more by engaging in contradiction when you are feeding - this will confuse
/.ers who will then make even more stupid replies, leaving them even more wide open for response.
Clues
If you're feeling brave, give the reader clues that this is an obvious troll. The classic example here is dmg's stock phrase "I am often accused of trolling (whatever that is)", but also feel free to use phrases like "I have not read the article, and I don't know much about XYZ but I feel I must comment". If anyone responds to a troll with these kinds of clues in it, feel free to bask in the glow of knee-jerk
/. responses.
- Denial
If you're unlucky someone will accuse you of being a troll (surely not!) and try and ruin it for you. If you don't want it all to end there, then be sure to counter it by accusing them of being small-minded and petty, saying that it's easier for them to say it's a troll than to accept that people have different opinions. Be sure to say this in the subject line, especially if their subject was the infamous "YHBT. YHL. HAND."
- Claiming credit
Given that
/. has its community of regular trolls (hi guys!), it's only polite to publish your troll on one of the so-called "hidden" forums for all to see and admire. This way, you get to bask in the praise of other trolls, they get to contribute to your's if they want to, and you get an easy way to find the troll later on when you want to check on its progress :)
As for when to post it, that's a matter of opinion really. You can either post it straight away or leave it will after people start biting. Remember that the troll forum is also frequented by non-trolls, and sometimes you may get a self-declared "troll-buster" try and expose you. But remember,
/.ers always post before thinking, and often it doesn't matter at all.
There is no real current forum at the moment thanks to various spammers hitting the sids, but try trolltalk, the original troll sid started by 80md and osm way back in the day. Generally all postings are done there as an AC, with your name at the end of the post. Include a link to the troll somewhere in the text, which ideally will be directly to the post and its replies - click on the #XX link in the thread to get there.
- Ending the troll
Sometimes you just get bored with a troll, or people start posting genuinely thoughtful stuff in reply (it does happen). When this happens it might be time to own up to the troll with a helpful "YHBT. YHL. HAND." post. Sometimes people will carry on a discussion of the issue, and if you're really lucky (and it was a great troll) they will completely fail to believe you and carry on arguing. If that happens, pat yourself on the back for writing a great troll
:)
- The cheap $3 crack
Finally, when all else fails and your troll gets moderated down to (-1, Troll) within ten seconds of you posting it, the only honourable thing to do is to accuse the moderators of smoking the cheap $3 crack (again) and give up
:(
Section 2 - Types of troll
- The Maniac
Probably the most popular kind of troll, the Maniac holds an opinion on something, and won't budge from that opinion no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented. If challenged, the Maniac will simply get more and more agitated and abusive, deriding his opponents as "idiots", "wrong-thinking", "dangerous" and "subversive". Generally the Maniac takes a position that opposes the prevalent
/. beliefs, but a similar effect can be achieved by taking a typical /. viewpoint and pushing it to ridiculous
extremes.
Maniacs can be crafted for practically every article
/. posts, although some are more obvious targets than others. Civil liberty articles, especially on things like censorship, DMCA, UCITA that really get /.ers riled up, are usually extremely fruitful grounds for a well-crafted maniac. The other obvious type of article is anything which could possibly involve religion, especially evolution :)
Here are some fruitful avenues to explore:
- The right-wing
Always popular, the right-wing maniac (RWM) is a God-fearing, gun-toting, flag-waving American, and proud of it. They don't care about the rest of the world, unless it's to "prove" that America is better than everything else, and they cannot stand liberal whining over civil rights. They hate the moral decay of America and want it to revert into a nation of heterosexual, Christian whites like it was meant to be. Woe betide anyone that dares to suggest otherwise.
- Religion
There are two ways to approach this kind of maniac. The harder to pull off is the militant atheist, but this is quite common amongst
/. posters and you would have to be very offensive to get this to work. Of course with religion trolls, the argument can go on for ever once it's started... The more common approach is the Christian fundamentalist. They are ignorant, intolerant and bigoted in the extreme. For them the Bible is the inerrant word of God revealed to man - it contains no flaws and no contradictions. Thus they are strict Creationists - mentions of evolution or cosmology will set them off on vitriolic rants. Flaming denunciations of anyone daring to contradict the "Word of God" are the way to go, and any kind of proof can always be ignored by appealing to "secular humanist brainwashing". And let's not forget, the USA is the greatest nation on Earth because it has the righteous power of Jesus Christ behind it.
- Ideology
Pick a philosophy, any philosophy. This troll is a troll with a cause - they have found some kind of ideological truth, and are out to expose every other philosophy as a sham. Whether it be libertarianism, objectivism, communism or capitalism, this troll will point out the obvious "flaws" in any other philosophies, whilst spouting dogma about their own. And the best thing is - you don't even need to know that much about what you're spouting - making doctrinaire mistakes will get both sides of the argument flaming you, adding to the fun.
- Software
This is an old favourite and crops up in many forms, covering the gamut from OS maniacs (Linux zealots, MS-apologists or embittered BSD fanatics), language maniacs (Pascal vs. C, C vs. C++, C++ vs. Java, Perl vs. Python, VB vs. everything),
application maniacs(GIMP vs. Photoshop, Netscape vs. IE, vi vs. emacs) and also includes people who complain about how technology should only be for the 31337 hackers.
- Guns
Americans love their guns, and will always fight passionately for their Constitutionally guarenteed rights to bear arms and shoot people. Even the slightest hint of criticism of this will bring down the wrath of a thousand and one enraged gun-owners on you, so it's always a great point to work into a troll
:)
- The right-wing
- The Expert
The Expert is someone who is "savvy" in their particular field, and is perfectly willing to give their opinion on any topic even vauguely related to their field. The Expert is most likely to be from a field which
/.ers as a rule despise - the classic example is dumb marketing guy, but try consultants, lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, executives, journalists (just think Jon Katz). With this kind of troll sweeping statements with little content are the norm, along wire dire portents of future catastrophe and dark hints of "insider knowledge".
Some possible angles to exploit:
- Industry knowledge
The expert knows the computing industry from the inside - as a long-term pro, they can dispense knowledge knowing that they can "speak for the industry". Their smug self-satisfaction is bound to annoy, as is any suggestion that things aren't the way that
/.ers would like it - saying "Linux requires the rock-solid guarantee of a trusted company like Microsoft" or "Apache cannot be trusted for mission-critical enterprise platforms" is guaranteed to get you denials explaining exactly why you're wrong, in excruciating detail.
- Helpful hints
With their tech-savvy (or law-savvy or whatever) experience, the expert is obviously the best person to point out what's wrong with things or to give out useful "factual" information. In fact this probably works best with lawyer trolls - for all that
/.ers protest "IANAL", they certainly seem to think they could be, and any mistakes you make will send them rushing to prove themselves by correcting you.
- Industry knowledge
- Offtopic Trolls
Not really a "troll" in the strict Jargon File sense of the word, but they certainly should be included here
:) This category includes parodies, offtopic weirdness any all kinds of amusing stuff. Not really my area of expertise, this stuff is mainly done by gnarphlager and opensourceman. Thanks to gnarphlager for this section.
Offtopic trolls, like any other, come in almost as many colours as an iMac, but generally not as cute. But then again, a good offtopic "troll" can affect more people than a repulsive little gumdrop on your desk, because you need to have someone SEE your desk before they can react. Simple? Moreso than even my overblown prose could indicate. Some basic examples:
- The serial troll
Write a story. Keep expanding it. It doesn't matter what article you post it under, so long as it's high up. If you want people to recognize you, pick a couple themes or symbols, and carry them on throughout the story. Other alternatives include back linking or including the entire story, but adding more each time. Be funny if you want. Or if you don't feel like being funny, just be really weird. Someone will react.
- The random troll
This has nothing to do with anything. Be it a stream of consciousness rant, or a description of the corner of your desk. Another favorite is a monologue, read as if spoken from any one given entity to another. The more outlandish, the better (a pair of socks talking to a mousepad, for example). If you really wanted to be artsy, work in an actual metaphor or legitimate meaning behind it, but it's not necessary.
- The vaguely related troll
Start out with a comment about the article. Have a definite opinion of it. Then, after a little while, disintegrate into randomness. All roads eventually can eventually lead to cheese (yum), Natalie Portman, cannibalism, toasters, squirrels, futons, you name it. All it takes is a little bit of creativity. Oh, and feel free to use other trolls' motifs. Open source and all that
;-)
General tips:
- If it's funny for a fleeting moment, then it's worth posting.
- Puns. Puns are only less vile than mimes, but it's hard to mime on
/. So feel free/obligated to litter your offtopic and random bits with puns. Hurt the bastards. And if they're sick enough to laugh at them, then they'll eventually end up here ;-)
- Obscure cultural references and injokes are always good. SOMEONE will get them eventually.
- Several drafts of a serial or random post are common, but true elegance is being able to come up with something on the spot that still makes the top 40 posts (on a post-heavy article)
- The serial troll
Section 3 - Useful trolling links
The following links contain background information useful for trolls needing quick quotes and "expert" opinions to include.
- General purpose links
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html - How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
:)
- www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.htm
l - A List Of Fallacious Arguments - Learn them and use them liberally - www.altairiv.demon.co.uk/troll/trollfaq.html - USENET troll HOWTO
- www.baiting.org - Baiting.org
- www.fieldingtravel.com/df/index.htm - Fielding's DangerFinder - A guide to what and where's dangerous
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html - How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
- Religious links
- www.godhatesamerica.com/ - God Hates America
- www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html - The Creed of Christian Reconstruction
- www.demonbuster.com - How to cast out your demons and do spiritual warfare
- riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/th
i ngs.htm - Things Creationists hate - www.icr.org/ - Institute for Creation Research
- www.xenu.net - Operation Clambake - The fight against Scientology on the net
- www.hom.net/~angels/ - Citizens for the Ten Commandments
- www.bju.edu/rcnbc.html - The difference between Catholics and Christians
- www.geocities.com/prazske00/biblequotes.html - Bible quotes by category
- www.godhatesamerica.com/ - God Hates America
- Political/economy links
- www.aynrand.org - The Ayn Rand Institute
- www.reason.com - Libertarian site
- www.freerepublic.com - Right-wing stuff
- www.jbs.org - Excellent site for all kinds of right-wingery
- www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html - Web economy bullshit generator
- www.aynrand.org - The Ayn Rand Institute
- Crackpot science links
- www.fixedearth.com - The Earth Is Not Moving
- www.jir.com/index.htm - The Journal of Irreproducible Results
- www.fixedearth.com - The Earth Is Not Moving
spiralx@spazmail.com
Copyright 2000 James Skinner - Timing
-
Re:Scary
-
It's Me Again, Lets Improve TrollingPlease help improve both the quantity and quality by becoming a troll, and also a better troll!
Slashdot Troll HOWTOThis is version 0.6 of a troll HOWTO, sort of a companion piece to jsm's excellent troll FAQ. As a draft, comments and criticism are always welcome, if not appreciated
:)Section 1 - Trolling techniques
There are techniques used by successful trolls to elicit the maximum amount of responses from unthinking
/.ers. This section is dedicated to explaining how to use these in the course of your trolls. Remember though, a great troll can break any or all of these and still be successful...- Timing
Because you're posting as an AC, your troll will generally be ignored in favour of posters using their accounts, and so getting in early is essential. A good guideline is to get into the first 20 posts, so that people reading the article will see the troll before it is swamped out. One way of increasing the speed with which you get your troll into play is to prepare them beforehand, and then quickly customise them for the current article. This is easier than it sounds since
/. typically repeats stories with small variations and runs lots of similar stories.Note that this is why Jon Katz stories are pretty worthless as trolling material - by the time you've found the article and prepared a troll there's already 50+ posts on it, most of them flaming Jon Katz anyway
:) - Exposure
Once you've got your troll in, you need people to actually read it. You also want replies -
/.ers are more likely to read your troll if it starts a large thread. You also want to remember that some people have set their comment thresholds to values higher than 0 - to get the attention of these you either want to get your post moderated up (see Style, below) or get a reply which gets moderated up to 4 or 5, in which case your troll becomes visible to all. - Accounts
An alternative to the time-honoured tradition of AC trolling is that of creating a "troll" account. This gives you the advantage of posting at 1 rather than 0, and slashbots are more likely to take you seriously, especially if you at least sound reasonable. If you do this, try to avoid posting stuff where it is obvious you're a troll under the account - post it anoymously instead - some slightly more canny readers actually check your user info before they reply. Not many though
:)The ultimate goal of the troll account is to secure the +1 bonus, which is currently received once you hit 26 points of Karma. To get there, employ the techniques of karma whoring that we see every day on
/. and watch the karma roll in. And of course once you get the +1 bonus, the world is your oyster in terms of /. Posts made at a default of 2 hit even those people with the threshold of 2, are more likely to get moderated up even further if they are at all coherent, and people tend to lose their critical thinking abilities in the face of the +1 bonus. Milk it for all it's worth. - Layout
To get people reading it a troll needs to be easily readable. Make sure you break it down into easily digestible paragraphs, use HTML tags where appropriate (but always make sure you close them properly) and use whitespace appropriately.
- Size
Generally a troll shouldn't be too short, otherwise it'll get lost in the crowd. A workable minimum is a couple of medium paragraphs. Conversely, it shouldn't be too long, or no-one will bother to read it. Keep it to a happy medium.
- Spelling
Whilst spelling is important if you want the troll to be taken "seriously", key spelling mistakes can draw out the spelling zealots, especially if you mis-spell the name of a venerated
/. hero, like Linus Torveldes or Richard Strawlman (thanks dmg). Related to this is the use of the wrong word, explaining an acronym as being something it isn't or making a word into an acronym even when it isn't. - Subject
The subject line needs to draw attention to your post without making it obvious that it is a troll. A simple statement of the main point of your argument can work here.
StyleOnce you realise that most moderators don't bother to read past the first paragraph or two, you can use this fact to craft trolls that can be moderated up as "Insightful" (note that I mean this in the
/. sense rather than the real-world sense). Start off fairly reasonable, making statements that are /. friendly and not being too controversial. As the troll goes on, make it more and more controversial, building it up for the coup de grace in the final paragraph. - Linking
As we all know, a post with links is considered "informative" by the
/. crowd. Moderators love it, and they rarely check the links, so be sure to include as many as possible. And make them wrong - a link to the Perl website should instead point to the Python website instead, and vice versa. The other alternative to incorrect links is "useful" links to places like www.linux.org and i.e. places /.ers could never have found on their own :) - Feeding
The ideal troll requires no feeding - it runs on its own, generating flamewars between clueless
/.ers for your amusement. But often a troll requires some help and so you should consider feeding it. Feeding is best reserved for people making either completely clueless responses, people making responses with holes in, or those wonderful people who write a 2000-word point-by-point rebuttal of your troll. - Know your audience
Always keep in mind the kind of things advocated on
/. so that you can play on and against them. This is why anti-Linux, creationist, gun-loving, pro-corporation trolls work well - the vast majority of /.ers hold the opposite viewpoints. And if a few people agree with you, so much the better - it merely validates your viewpoint in the eyes of readers. - Arrogance
Be arrogant. You, as a troll, know that you're right. No other explanation could exist. The wronger the "fact", the more assertively you should state it. Make it clear that you are better than everyone else - you know the truth and they are just too stupid to realise it. Use plenty of sarcasm, and use "quotes" to show it to people too dumb to realise.
- Offensiveness
Being offensive in your initial troll can be counter-productive - it causes moderators to mark you down as flamebait in general. But if you're feeding, then you can get away with calling
/.ers all kinds of things. Make broad generalisations about /. readers - call them "long-haired Linux zealots", "socialist open-source bigots" or whatever. Stereotyping is encouraged - people always want to think that they're an individual, and will point this out to you given half a chance. - Indifference
Great for articles with a political or social bent, this kind of troll expresses complete indifference to the topic at hand, wondering who on Earth cares about it. An alternative method is to say that the topic only concerns a certain group of people - criminals, idiots, hackers (always use this instead of crackers) or whatever group you want to offend.
- Sympathy
Appear to take the same stance as the people you're trying to troll - claim you're as much a fan of Linux as the next man, but... This way you can make all kinds of claims in the sure knowledge that you actually know what you're talking about. A great phrase to use here is "In my experience". Remember to act like all the things you're pointing out are unfortunate but true.
- The common touch
Always accuse
/.ers of being elitist. This is an easy thing to do seeing as a lot of them are. Claim that is their grandmother couldn't use it, then they are just into it to feel better than Joe Sixpack rather than "doing it for the average user". This is always great for working into anti-Linux trolls - attack command-line tools and poorly designed desktops. - The 31337 touch
The opposite of the above. Claim that technology or whatever is only for the elite of society and that any attempt to open it up for everyone is wrong, an attack on intellectualism and possibly even dangerous. If people were meant to understand these things then they would, and it's their fault if they're too stupid to learn.
- Contradiction
Never be afraid to contradict yourself, even in the space of a single sentence. The phrases "I am a top programmer who codes in VB" or "I am a supporter of open source who uses NT at work and 95 at home" will be sure to get a response from some weenie smugly pointing out the contradiction. Confuse the issue more by engaging in contradiction when you are feeding - this will confuse
/.ers who will then make even more stupid replies, leaving them even more wide open for response.Clues
If you're feeling brave, give the reader clues that this is an obvious troll. The classic example here is dmg's stock phrase "I am often accused of trolling (whatever that is)", but also feel free to use phrases like "I have not read the article, and I don't know much about XYZ but I feel I must comment". If anyone responds to a troll with these kinds of clues in it, feel free to bask in the glow of knee-jerk
/. responses. - Denial
If you're unlucky someone will accuse you of being a troll (surely not!) and try and ruin it for you. If you don't want it all to end there, then be sure to counter it by accusing them of being small-minded and petty, saying that it's easier for them to say it's a troll than to accept that people have different opinions. Be sure to say this in the subject line, especially if their subject was the infamous "YHBT. YHL. HAND."
- Claiming credit
Given that
/. has its community of regular trolls (hi guys!), it's only polite to publish your troll on one of the so-called "hidden" forums for all to see and admire. This way, you get to bask in the praise of other trolls, they get to contribute to your's if they want to, and you get an easy way to find the troll later on when you want to check on its progress :)As for when to post it, that's a matter of opinion really. You can either post it straight away or leave it will after people start biting. Remember that the troll forum is also frequented by non-trolls, and sometimes you may get a self-declared "troll-buster" try and expose you. But remember,
/.ers always post before thinking, and often it doesn't matter at all.There is no real current forum at the moment thanks to various spammers hitting the sids, but try trolltalk, the original troll sid started by 80md and osm way back in the day. Generally all postings are done there as an AC, with your name at the end of the post. Include a link to the troll somewhere in the text, which ideally will be directly to the post and its replies - click on the #XX link in the thread to get there.
- Ending the troll
Sometimes you just get bored with a troll, or people start posting genuinely thoughtful stuff in reply (it does happen). When this happens it might be time to own up to the troll with a helpful "YHBT. YHL. HAND." post. Sometimes people will carry on a discussion of the issue, and if you're really lucky (and it was a great troll) they will completely fail to believe you and carry on arguing. If that happens, pat yourself on the back for writing a great troll
:) - The cheap $3 crack
Finally, when all else fails and your troll gets moderated down to (-1, Troll) within ten seconds of you posting it, the only honourable thing to do is to accuse the moderators of smoking the cheap $3 crack (again) and give up
:(
Section 2 - Types of troll
- The Maniac
Probably the most popular kind of troll, the Maniac holds an opinion on something, and won't budge from that opinion no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented. If challenged, the Maniac will simply get more and more agitated and abusive, deriding his opponents as "idiots", "wrong-thinking", "dangerous" and "subversive". Generally the Maniac takes a position that opposes the prevalent
/. beliefs, but a similar effect can be achieved by taking a typical /. viewpoint and pushing it to ridiculous extremes.Maniacs can be crafted for practically every article
/. posts, although some are more obvious targets than others. Civil liberty articles, especially on things like censorship, DMCA, UCITA that really get /.ers riled up, are usually extremely fruitful grounds for a well-crafted maniac. The other obvious type of article is anything which could possibly involve religion, especially evolution :)Here are some fruitful avenues to explore:
- The right-wing
Always popular, the right-wing maniac (RWM) is a God-fearing, gun-toting, flag-waving American, and proud of it. They don't care about the rest of the world, unless it's to "prove" that America is better than everything else, and they cannot stand liberal whining over civil rights. They hate the moral decay of America and want it to revert into a nation of heterosexual, Christian whites like it was meant to be. Woe betide anyone that dares to suggest otherwise.
- Religion
There are two ways to approach this kind of maniac. The harder to pull off is the militant atheist, but this is quite common amongst
/. posters and you would have to be very offensive to get this to work. Of course with religion trolls, the argument can go on for ever once it's started... The more common approach is the Christian fundamentalist. They are ignorant, intolerant and bigoted in the extreme. For them the Bible is the inerrant word of God revealed to man - it contains no flaws and no contradictions. Thus they are strict Creationists - mentions of evolution or cosmology will set them off on vitriolic rants. Flaming denunciations of anyone daring to contradict the "Word of God" are the way to go, and any kind of proof can always be ignored by appealing to "secular humanist brainwashing". And let's not forget, the USA is the greatest nation on Earth because it has the righteous power of Jesus Christ behind it. - Ideology
Pick a philosophy, any philosophy. This troll is a troll with a cause - they have found some kind of ideological truth, and are out to expose every other philosophy as a sham. Whether it be libertarianism, objectivism, communism or capitalism, this troll will point out the obvious "flaws" in any other philosophies, whilst spouting dogma about their own. And the best thing is - you don't even need to know that much about what you're spouting - making doctrinaire mistakes will get both sides of the argument flaming you, adding to the fun.
- Software
This is an old favourite and crops up in many forms, covering the gamut from OS maniacs (Linux zealots, MS-apologists or embittered BSD fanatics), language maniacs (Pascal vs. C, C vs. C++, C++ vs. Java, Perl vs. Python, VB vs. everything), application maniacs(GIMP vs. Photoshop, Netscape vs. IE, vi vs. emacs) and also includes people who complain about how technology should only be for the 31337 hackers.Guns
Americans love their guns, and will always fight passionately for their Constitutionally guarenteed rights to bear arms and shoot people. Even the slightest hint of criticism of this will bring down the wrath of a thousand and one enraged gun-owners on you, so it's always a great point to work into a troll
:)
- The right-wing
- The Expert
The Expert is someone who is "savvy" in their particular field, and is perfectly willing to give their opinion on any topic even vauguely related to their field. The Expert is most likely to be from a field which
/.ers as a rule despise - the classic example is dumb marketing guy, but try consultants, lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, executives, journalists (just think Jon Katz). With this kind of troll sweeping statements with little content are the norm, along wire dire portents of future catastrophe and dark hints of "insider knowledge".Some possible angles to exploit:
- Industry knowledge
The expert knows the computing industry from the inside - as a long-term pro, they can dispense knowledge knowing that they can "speak for the industry". Their smug self-satisfaction is bound to annoy, as is any suggestion that things aren't the way that
/.ers would like it - saying "Linux requires the rock-solid guarantee of a trusted company like Microsoft" or "Apache cannot be trusted for mission-critical enterprise platforms" is guaranteed to get you denials explaining exactly why you're wrong, in excruciating detail. - Helpful hints
With their tech-savvy (or law-savvy or whatever) experience, the expert is obviously the best person to point out what's wrong with things or to give out useful "factual" information. In fact this probably works best with lawyer trolls - for all that
/.ers protest "IANAL", they certainly seem to think they could be, and any mistakes you make will send them rushing to prove themselves by correcting you.
- Industry knowledge
- Offtopic Trolls
Not really a "troll" in the strict Jargon File sense of the word, but they certainly should be included here
:) This category includes parodies, offtopic weirdness any all kinds of amusing stuff. Not really my area of expertise, this stuff is mainly done by gnarphlager and opensourceman. Thanks to gnarphlager for this section.Offtopic trolls, like any other, come in almost as many colours as an iMac, but generally not as cute. But then again, a good offtopic "troll" can affect more people than a repulsive little gumdrop on your desk, because you need to have someone SEE your desk before they can react. Simple? Moreso than even my overblown prose could indicate. Some basic examples:
- The serial troll
Write a story. Keep expanding it. It doesn't matter what article you post it under, so long as it's high up. If you want people to recognize you, pick a couple themes or symbols, and carry them on throughout the story. Other alternatives include back linking or including the entire story, but adding more each time. Be funny if you want. Or if you don't feel like being funny, just be really weird. Someone will react.
- The random troll
This has nothing to do with anything. Be it a stream of consciousness rant, or a description of the corner of your desk. Another favorite is a monologue, read as if spoken from any one given entity to another. The more outlandish, the better (a pair of socks talking to a mousepad, for example). If you really wanted to be artsy, work in an actual metaphor or legitimate meaning behind it, but it's not necessary.
- The vaguely related troll
Start out with a comment about the article. Have a definite opinion of it. Then, after a little while, disintegrate into randomness. All roads eventually can eventually lead to cheese (yum), Natalie Portman, cannibalism, toasters, squirrels, futons, you name it. All it takes is a little bit of creativity. Oh, and feel free to use other trolls' motifs. Open source and all that
;-)
General tips:
- If it's funny for a fleeting moment, then it's worth posting.
- Puns. Puns are only less vile than mimes, but it's hard to mime on
/. So feel free/obligated to litter your offtopic and random bits with puns. Hurt the bastards. And if they're sick enough to laugh at them, then they'll eventually end up here ;-) - Obscure cultural references and injokes are always good. SOMEONE will get them eventually.
- Several drafts of a serial or random post are common, but true elegance is being able to come up with something on the spot that still makes the top 40 posts (on a post-heavy article)
- The serial troll
Section 3 - Useful trolling links
The following links contain background information useful for trolls needing quick quotes and "expert" opinions to include.
- General purpose links
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html - How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
:) - www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.htm
l - A List Of Fallacious Arguments - Learn them and use them liberally - www.altairiv.demon.co.uk/troll/trollfaq.html - USENET troll HOWTO
- www.baiting.org - Baiting.org
- www.fieldingtravel.com/df/index.htm - Fielding's DangerFinder - A guide to what and where's dangerous
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html - How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
- Religious links
- www.godhatesamerica.com/ - God Hates America
- www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html - The Creed of Christian Reconstruction
- www.demonbuster.com - How to cast out your demons and do spiritual warfare
- riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/th
i ngs.htm - Things Creationists hate - www.icr.org/ - Institute for Creation Research
- www.xenu.net - Operation Clambake - The fight against Scientology on the net
- www.hom.net/~angels/ - Citizens for the Ten Commandments
- www.bju.edu/rcnbc.html - The difference between Catholics and Christians
- www.geocities.com/prazske00/biblequotes.html - Bible quotes by category
- Political/economy links
- www.aynrand.org - The Ayn Rand Institute
- www.reason.com - Libertarian site
- www.freerepublic.com - Right-wing stuff
- www.jbs.org - Excellent site for all kinds of right-wingery
- www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html - Web economy bullshit generator
- Crackpot science links
- www.fixedearth.com - The Earth Is Not Moving
- www.jir.com/index.htm - The Journal of Irreproducible Results
- Timing
-
It's Me Again, Lets Improve Slashdot TrollingPlease help improve both the quantity and quality by becoming a troll, and also a better troll!
Slashdot Troll HOWTOThis is version 0.6 of a troll HOWTO, sort of a companion piece to jsm's excellent troll FAQ. As a draft, comments and criticism are always welcome, if not appreciated
:)Section 1 - Trolling techniques
There are techniques used by successful trolls to elicit the maximum amount of responses from unthinking
/.ers. This section is dedicated to explaining how to use these in the course of your trolls. Remember though, a great troll can break any or all of these and still be successful...- Timing
Because you're posting as an AC, your troll will generally be ignored in favour of posters using their accounts, and so getting in early is essential. A good guideline is to get into the first 20 posts, so that people reading the article will see the troll before it is swamped out. One way of increasing the speed with which you get your troll into play is to prepare them beforehand, and then quickly customise them for the current article. This is easier than it sounds since
/. typically repeats stories with small variations and runs lots of similar stories.Note that this is why Jon Katz stories are pretty worthless as trolling material - by the time you've found the article and prepared a troll there's already 50+ posts on it, most of them flaming Jon Katz anyway
:) - Exposure
Once you've got your troll in, you need people to actually read it. You also want replies -
/.ers are more likely to read your troll if it starts a large thread. You also want to remember that some people have set their comment thresholds to values higher than 0 - to get the attention of these you either want to get your post moderated up (see Style, below) or get a reply which gets moderated up to 4 or 5, in which case your troll becomes visible to all. - Accounts
An alternative to the time-honoured tradition of AC trolling is that of creating a "troll" account. This gives you the advantage of posting at 1 rather than 0, and slashbots are more likely to take you seriously, especially if you at least sound reasonable. If you do this, try to avoid posting stuff where it is obvious you're a troll under the account - post it anoymously instead - some slightly more canny readers actually check your user info before they reply. Not many though
:)The ultimate goal of the troll account is to secure the +1 bonus, which is currently received once you hit 26 points of Karma. To get there, employ the techniques of karma whoring that we see every day on
/. and watch the karma roll in. And of course once you get the +1 bonus, the world is your oyster in terms of /. Posts made at a default of 2 hit even those people with the threshold of 2, are more likely to get moderated up even further if they are at all coherent, and people tend to lose their critical thinking abilities in the face of the +1 bonus. Milk it for all it's worth. - Layout
To get people reading it a troll needs to be easily readable. Make sure you break it down into easily digestible paragraphs, use HTML tags where appropriate (but always make sure you close them properly) and use whitespace appropriately.
- Size
Generally a troll shouldn't be too short, otherwise it'll get lost in the crowd. A workable minimum is a couple of medium paragraphs. Conversely, it shouldn't be too long, or no-one will bother to read it. Keep it to a happy medium.
- Spelling
Whilst spelling is important if you want the troll to be taken "seriously", key spelling mistakes can draw out the spelling zealots, especially if you mis-spell the name of a venerated
/. hero, like Linus Torveldes or Richard Strawlman (thanks dmg). Related to this is the use of the wrong word, explaining an acronym as being something it isn't or making a word into an acronym even when it isn't. - Subject
The subject line needs to draw attention to your post without making it obvious that it is a troll. A simple statement of the main point of your argument can work here.
StyleOnce you realise that most moderators don't bother to read past the first paragraph or two, you can use this fact to craft trolls that can be moderated up as "Insightful" (note that I mean this in the
/. sense rather than the real-world sense). Start off fairly reasonable, making statements that are /. friendly and not being too controversial. As the troll goes on, make it more and more controversial, building it up for the coup de grace in the final paragraph. - Linking
As we all know, a post with links is considered "informative" by the
/. crowd. Moderators love it, and they rarely check the links, so be sure to include as many as possible. And make them wrong - a link to the Perl website should instead point to the Python website instead, and vice versa. The other alternative to incorrect links is "useful" links to places like www.linux.org and i.e. places /.ers could never have found on their own :) - Feeding
The ideal troll requires no feeding - it runs on its own, generating flamewars between clueless
/.ers for your amusement. But often a troll requires some help and so you should consider feeding it. Feeding is best reserved for people making either completely clueless responses, people making responses with holes in, or those wonderful people who write a 2000-word point-by-point rebuttal of your troll. - Know your audience
Always keep in mind the kind of things advocated on
/. so that you can play on and against them. This is why anti-Linux, creationist, gun-loving, pro-corporation trolls work well - the vast majority of /.ers hold the opposite viewpoints. And if a few people agree with you, so much the better - it merely validates your viewpoint in the eyes of readers. - Arrogance
Be arrogant. You, as a troll, know that you're right. No other explanation could exist. The wronger the "fact", the more assertively you should state it. Make it clear that you are better than everyone else - you know the truth and they are just too stupid to realise it. Use plenty of sarcasm, and use "quotes" to show it to people too dumb to realise.
- Offensiveness
Being offensive in your initial troll can be counter-productive - it causes moderators to mark you down as flamebait in general. But if you're feeding, then you can get away with calling
/.ers all kinds of things. Make broad generalisations about /. readers - call them "long-haired Linux zealots", "socialist open-source bigots" or whatever. Stereotyping is encouraged - people always want to think that they're an individual, and will point this out to you given half a chance. - Indifference
Great for articles with a political or social bent, this kind of troll expresses complete indifference to the topic at hand, wondering who on Earth cares about it. An alternative method is to say that the topic only concerns a certain group of people - criminals, idiots, hackers (always use this instead of crackers) or whatever group you want to offend.
- Sympathy
Appear to take the same stance as the people you're trying to troll - claim you're as much a fan of Linux as the next man, but... This way you can make all kinds of claims in the sure knowledge that you actually know what you're talking about. A great phrase to use here is "In my experience". Remember to act like all the things you're pointing out are unfortunate but true.
- The common touch
Always accuse
/.ers of being elitist. This is an easy thing to do seeing as a lot of them are. Claim that is their grandmother couldn't use it, then they are just into it to feel better than Joe Sixpack rather than "doing it for the average user". This is always great for working into anti-Linux trolls - attack command-line tools and poorly designed desktops. - The 31337 touch
The opposite of the above. Claim that technology or whatever is only for the elite of society and that any attempt to open it up for everyone is wrong, an attack on intellectualism and possibly even dangerous. If people were meant to understand these things then they would, and it's their fault if they're too stupid to learn.
- Contradiction
Never be afraid to contradict yourself, even in the space of a single sentence. The phrases "I am a top programmer who codes in VB" or "I am a supporter of open source who uses NT at work and 95 at home" will be sure to get a response from some weenie smugly pointing out the contradiction. Confuse the issue more by engaging in contradiction when you are feeding - this will confuse
/.ers who will then make even more stupid replies, leaving them even more wide open for response.Clues
If you're feeling brave, give the reader clues that this is an obvious troll. The classic example here is dmg's stock phrase "I am often accused of trolling (whatever that is)", but also feel free to use phrases like "I have not read the article, and I don't know much about XYZ but I feel I must comment". If anyone responds to a troll with these kinds of clues in it, feel free to bask in the glow of knee-jerk
/. responses. - Denial
If you're unlucky someone will accuse you of being a troll (surely not!) and try and ruin it for you. If you don't want it all to end there, then be sure to counter it by accusing them of being small-minded and petty, saying that it's easier for them to say it's a troll than to accept that people have different opinions. Be sure to say this in the subject line, especially if their subject was the infamous "YHBT. YHL. HAND."
- Claiming credit
Given that
/. has its community of regular trolls (hi guys!), it's only polite to publish your troll on one of the so-called "hidden" forums for all to see and admire. This way, you get to bask in the praise of other trolls, they get to contribute to your's if they want to, and you get an easy way to find the troll later on when you want to check on its progress :)As for when to post it, that's a matter of opinion really. You can either post it straight away or leave it will after people start biting. Remember that the troll forum is also frequented by non-trolls, and sometimes you may get a self-declared "troll-buster" try and expose you. But remember,
/.ers always post before thinking, and often it doesn't matter at all.There is no real current forum at the moment thanks to various spammers hitting the sids, but try trolltalk, the original troll sid started by 80md and osm way back in the day. Generally all postings are done there as an AC, with your name at the end of the post. Include a link to the troll somewhere in the text, which ideally will be directly to the post and its replies - click on the #XX link in the thread to get there.
- Ending the troll
Sometimes you just get bored with a troll, or people start posting genuinely thoughtful stuff in reply (it does happen). When this happens it might be time to own up to the troll with a helpful "YHBT. YHL. HAND." post. Sometimes people will carry on a discussion of the issue, and if you're really lucky (and it was a great troll) they will completely fail to believe you and carry on arguing. If that happens, pat yourself on the back for writing a great troll
:) - The cheap $3 crack
Finally, when all else fails and your troll gets moderated down to (-1, Troll) within ten seconds of you posting it, the only honourable thing to do is to accuse the moderators of smoking the cheap $3 crack (again) and give up
:(
Section 2 - Types of troll
- The Maniac
Probably the most popular kind of troll, the Maniac holds an opinion on something, and won't budge from that opinion no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented. If challenged, the Maniac will simply get more and more agitated and abusive, deriding his opponents as "idiots", "wrong-thinking", "dangerous" and "subversive". Generally the Maniac takes a position that opposes the prevalent
/. beliefs, but a similar effect can be achieved by taking a typical /. viewpoint and pushing it to ridiculous extremes.Maniacs can be crafted for practically every article
/. posts, although some are more obvious targets than others. Civil liberty articles, especially on things like censorship, DMCA, UCITA that really get /.ers riled up, are usually extremely fruitful grounds for a well-crafted maniac. The other obvious type of article is anything which could possibly involve religion, especially evolution :)Here are some fruitful avenues to explore:
- The right-wing
Always popular, the right-wing maniac (RWM) is a God-fearing, gun-toting, flag-waving American, and proud of it. They don't care about the rest of the world, unless it's to "prove" that America is better than everything else, and they cannot stand liberal whining over civil rights. They hate the moral decay of America and want it to revert into a nation of heterosexual, Christian whites like it was meant to be. Woe betide anyone that dares to suggest otherwise.
- Religion
There are two ways to approach this kind of maniac. The harder to pull off is the militant atheist, but this is quite common amongst
/. posters and you would have to be very offensive to get this to work. Of course with religion trolls, the argument can go on for ever once it's started... The more common approach is the Christian fundamentalist. They are ignorant, intolerant and bigoted in the extreme. For them the Bible is the inerrant word of God revealed to man - it contains no flaws and no contradictions. Thus they are strict Creationists - mentions of evolution or cosmology will set them off on vitriolic rants. Flaming denunciations of anyone daring to contradict the "Word of God" are the way to go, and any kind of proof can always be ignored by appealing to "secular humanist brainwashing". And let's not forget, the USA is the greatest nation on Earth because it has the righteous power of Jesus Christ behind it. - Ideology
Pick a philosophy, any philosophy. This troll is a troll with a cause - they have found some kind of ideological truth, and are out to expose every other philosophy as a sham. Whether it be libertarianism, objectivism, communism or capitalism, this troll will point out the obvious "flaws" in any other philosophies, whilst spouting dogma about their own. And the best thing is - you don't even need to know that much about what you're spouting - making doctrinaire mistakes will get both sides of the argument flaming you, adding to the fun.
- Software
This is an old favourite and crops up in many forms, covering the gamut from OS maniacs (Linux zealots, MS-apologists or embittered BSD fanatics), language maniacs (Pascal vs. C, C vs. C++, C++ vs. Java, Perl vs. Python, VB vs. everything), application maniacs(GIMP vs. Photoshop, Netscape vs. IE, vi vs. emacs) and also includes people who complain about how technology should only be for the 31337 hackers.Guns
Americans love their guns, and will always fight passionately for their Constitutionally guarenteed rights to bear arms and shoot people. Even the slightest hint of criticism of this will bring down the wrath of a thousand and one enraged gun-owners on you, so it's always a great point to work into a troll
:)
- The right-wing
- The Expert
The Expert is someone who is "savvy" in their particular field, and is perfectly willing to give their opinion on any topic even vauguely related to their field. The Expert is most likely to be from a field which
/.ers as a rule despise - the classic example is dumb marketing guy, but try consultants, lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, executives, journalists (just think Jon Katz). With this kind of troll sweeping statements with little content are the norm, along wire dire portents of future catastrophe and dark hints of "insider knowledge".Some possible angles to exploit:
- Industry knowledge
The expert knows the computing industry from the inside - as a long-term pro, they can dispense knowledge knowing that they can "speak for the industry". Their smug self-satisfaction is bound to annoy, as is any suggestion that things aren't the way that
/.ers would like it - saying "Linux requires the rock-solid guarantee of a trusted company like Microsoft" or "Apache cannot be trusted for mission-critical enterprise platforms" is guaranteed to get you denials explaining exactly why you're wrong, in excruciating detail. - Helpful hints
With their tech-savvy (or law-savvy or whatever) experience, the expert is obviously the best person to point out what's wrong with things or to give out useful "factual" information. In fact this probably works best with lawyer trolls - for all that
/.ers protest "IANAL", they certainly seem to think they could be, and any mistakes you make will send them rushing to prove themselves by correcting you.
Not really a "troll" in the strict Jargon File sense of the word, but they certainly should be included here
:) This category includes parodies, offtopic weirdness any all kinds of amusing stuff. Not really my area of expertise, this stuff is mainly done by gnarphlager and opensourceman. Thanks to gnarphlager for this section.Offtopic trolls, like any other, come in almost as many colours as an iMac, but generally not as cute. But then again, a good offtopic "troll" can affect more people than a repulsive little gumdrop on your desk, because you need to have someone SEE your desk before they can react. Simple? Moreso than even my overblown prose could indicate. Some basic examples:
- The serial troll
Write a story. Keep expanding it. It doesn't matter what article you post it under, so long as it's high up. If you want people to recognize you, pick a couple themes or symbols, and carry them on throughout the story. Other alternatives include back linking or including the entire story, but adding more each time. Be funny if you want. Or if you don't feel like being funny, just be really weird. Someone will react.
- The random troll
This has nothing to do with anything. Be it a stream of consciousness rant, or a description of the corner of your desk. Another favorite is a monologue, read as if spoken from any one given entity to another. The more outlandish, the better (a pair of socks talking to a mousepad, for example). If you really wanted to be artsy, work in an actual metaphor or legitimate meaning behind it, but it's not necessary.
- The vaguely related troll
Start out with a comment about the article. Have a definite opinion of it. Then, after a little while, disintegrate into randomness. All roads eventually can eventually lead to cheese (yum), Natalie Portman, cannibalism, toasters, squirrels, futons, you name it. All it takes is a little bit of creativity. Oh, and feel free to use other trolls' motifs. Open source and all that
;-)
General tips:
- If it's funny for a fleeting moment, then it's worth posting.
- Puns. Puns are only less vile than mimes, but it's hard to mime on
/. So feel free/obligated to litter your offtopic and random bits with puns. Hurt the bastards. And if they're sick enough to laugh at them, then they'll eventually end up here ;-) - Obscure cultural references and injokes are always good. SOMEONE will get them eventually.
- Several drafts of a serial or random post are common, but true elegance is being able to come up with something on the spot that still makes the top 40 posts (on a post-heavy article)
- Industry knowledge
Section 3 - Useful trolling links
The following links contain background information useful for trolls needing quick quotes and "expert" opinions to include.
- General purpose links
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html - How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
:) - www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.htm
l - A List Of Fallacious Arguments - Learn them and use them liberally - www.altairiv.demon.co.uk/troll/trollfaq.html - USENET troll HOWTO
- www.baiting.org - Baiting.org
- www.fieldingtravel.com/df/index.htm - Fielding's DangerFinder - A guide to what and where's dangerous
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html - How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
- Religious links
- www.godhatesamerica.com/ - God Hates America
- www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html - The Creed of Christian Reconstruction
- www.demonbuster.com - How to cast out your demons and do spiritual warfare
- riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/th
i ngs.htm - Things Creationists hate - www.icr.org/ - Institute for Creation Research
- www.xenu.net - Operation Clambake - The fight against Scientology on the net
- www.hom.net/~angels/ - Citizens for the Ten Commandments
- www.bju.edu/rcnbc.html - The difference between Catholics and Christians
- www.geocities.com/prazske00/biblequotes.html - Bible quotes by category
- Political/economy links
- www.aynrand.org - The Ayn Rand Institute
- www.reason.com - Libertarian site
- www.freerepublic.com - Right-wing stuff
- www.jbs.org - Excellent site for all kinds of right-wingery
- www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html - Web economy bullshit generator
- Crackpot science links
- www.fixedearth.com - The Earth Is Not Moving
- www.jir.com/index.htm - The Journal of Irreproducible Results
- Timing
-
HOW TO TROLL SLASHDOT
Section 1 - Trolling techniques
There are techniques used by successful trolls to elicit the maximum amount of responses from unthinking
/.ers. This section is dedicated to explaining how to use these in the course of your trolls. Remember though, a great troll can break any or all of these and still be successful...- Timing
Because you're posting as an AC, your troll will generally be ignored in favour of posters using their accounts, and so getting in early is essential. A good guideline is to get into the first 20 posts, so that people reading the article will see the troll before it is swamped out. One way of increasing the speed with which you get your troll into play is to prepare them beforehand, and then quickly customise them for the current article. This is easier than it sounds since
/. typically repeats stories with small variations and runs lots of similar stories.Note that this is why Jon Katz stories are pretty worthless as trolling material - by the time you've found the article and prepared a troll there's already 50+ posts on it, most of them flaming Jon Katz anyway
:) - Exposure
Once you've got your troll in, you need people to actually read it. You also want replies -
/.ers are more likely to read your troll if it starts a large thread. You also want to remember that some people have set their comment thresholds to values higher than 0 - to get the attention of these you either want to get your post moderated up (see Style, below) or get a reply which gets moderated up to 4 or 5, in which case your troll becomes visible to all. - Accounts
An alternative to the time-honoured tradition of AC trolling is that of creating a "troll" account. This gives you the advantage of posting at 1 rather than 0, and slashbots are more likely to take you seriously, especially if you at least sound reasonable. If you do this, try to avoid posting stuff where it is obvious you're a troll under the account - post it anoymously instead - some slightly more canny readers actually check your user info before they reply. Not many though
:)The ultimate goal of the troll account is to secure the +1 bonus, which is currently received once you hit 26 points of Karma. To get there, employ the techniques of karma whoring that we see every day on
/. and watch the karma roll in. And of course once you get the +1 bonus, the world is your oyster in terms of /. Posts made at a default of 2 hit even those people with the threshold of 2, are more likely to get moderated up even further if they are at all coherent, and people tend to lose their critical thinking abilities in the face of the +1 bonus. Milk it for all it's worth. - Layout
To get people reading it a troll needs to be easily readable. Make sure you break it down into easily digestible paragraphs, use HTML tags where appropriate (but always make sure you close them properly) and use whitespace appropriately.
- Size
Generally a troll shouldn't be too short, otherwise it'll get lost in the crowd. A workable minimum is a couple of medium paragraphs. Conversely, it shouldn't be too long, or no-one will bother to read it. Keep it to a happy medium.
- Spelling
Whilst spelling is important if you want the troll to be taken "seriously", key spelling mistakes can draw out the spelling zealots, especially if you mis-spell the name of a venerated
/. hero, like Linus Torveldes or Richard Strawlman (thanks dmg). Related to this is the use of the wrong word, explaining an acronym as being something it isn't or making a word into an acronym even when it isn't. - Subject
The subject line needs to draw attention to your post without making it obvious that it is a troll. A simple statement of the main point of your argument can work here.
- Style
Once you realise that most moderators don't bother to read past the first paragraph or two, you can use this fact to craft trolls that can be moderated up as "Insightful" (note that I mean this in the
/. sense rather than the real-world sense). Start off fairly reasonable, making statements that are /. friendly and not being too controversial. As the troll goes on, make it more and more controversial, building it up for the coup de grace in the final paragraph. - Linking
As we all know, a post with links is considered "informative" by the
/. crowd. Moderators love it, and they rarely check the links, so be sure to include as many as possible. And make them wrong - a link to the Perl website should instead point to the Python website instead, and vice versa. The other alternative to incorrect links is "useful" links to places like www.linux.org and www.microsoft.com i.e. places /.ers could never have found on their own :) - Feeding
The ideal troll requires no feeding - it runs on its own, generating flamewars between clueless
/.ers for your amusement. But often a troll requires some help and so you should consider feeding it. Feeding is best reserved for people making either completely clueless responses, people making responses with holes in, or those wonderful people who write a 2000-word point-by-point rebuttal of your troll. - Know your audience
Always keep in mind the kind of things advocated on
/. so that you can play on and against them. This is why anti-Linux, creationist, gun-loving, pro-corporation trolls work well - the vast majority of /.ers hold the opposite viewpoints. And if a few people agree with you, so much the better - it merely validates your viewpoint in the eyes of readers. - Arrogance
Be arrogant. You, as a troll, know that you're right. No other explanation could exist. The wronger the "fact", the more assertively you should state it. Make it clear that you are better than everyone else - you know the truth and they are just too stupid to realise it. Use plenty of sarcasm, and use "quotes" to show it to people too dumb to realise.
- Offensiveness
Being offensive in your initial troll can be counter-productive - it causes moderators to mark you down as flamebait in general. But if you're feeding, then you can get away with calling
/.ers all kinds of things. Make broad generalisations about /. readers - call them "long-haired Linux zealots", "socialist open-source bigots" or whatever. Stereotyping is encouraged - people always want to think that they're an individual, and will point this out to you given half a chance. - Indifference
Great for articles with a political or social bent, this kind of troll expresses complete indifference to the topic at hand, wondering who on Earth cares about it. An alternative method is to say that the topic only concerns a certain group of people - criminals, idiots, hackers (always use this instead of crackers) or whatever group you want to offend.
- Sympathy
Appear to take the same stance as the people you're trying to troll - claim you're as much a fan of Linux as the next man, but... This way you can make all kinds of claims in the sure knowledge that you actually know what you're talking about. A great phrase to use here is "In my experience". Remember to act like all the things you're pointing out are unfortunate but true.
- The common touch
Always accuse
/.ers of being elitist. This is an easy thing to do seeing as a lot of them are. Claim that is their grandmother couldn't use it, then they are just into it to feel better than Joe Sixpack rather than "doing it for the average user". This is always great for working into anti-Linux trolls - attack command-line tools and poorly designed desktops. - The 31337 touch
The opposite of the above. Claim that technology or whatever is only for the elite of society and that any attempt to open it up for everyone is wrong, an attack on intellectualism and possibly even dangerous. If people were meant to understand these things then they would, and it's their fault if they're too stupid to learn.
- Contradiction
Never be afraid to contradict yourself, even in the space of a single sentence. The phrases "I am a top programmer who codes in VB" or "I am a supporter of open source who uses NT at work and 95 at home" will be sure to get a response from some weenie smugly pointing out the contradiction. Confuse the issue more by engaging in contradiction when you are feeding - this will confuse
/.ers who will then make even more stupid replies, leaving them even more wide open for response.Clues
If you're feeling brave, give the reader clues that this is an obvious troll. The classic example here is dmg's stock phrase "I am often accused of trolling (whatever that is)", but also feel free to use phrases like "I have not read the article, and I don't know much about XYZ but I feel I must comment". If anyone responds to a troll with these kinds of clues in it, feel free to bask in the glow of knee-jerk
/. responses. - Denial
If you're unlucky someone will accuse you of being a troll (surely not!) and try and ruin it for you. If you don't want it all to end there, then be sure to counter it by accusing them of being small-minded and petty, saying that it's easier for them to say it's a troll than to accept that people have different opinions. Be sure to say this in the subject line, especially if their subject was the infamous "YHBT. YHL. HAND."
- Claiming credit
Given that
/. has its community of regular trolls (hi guys!), it's only polite to publish your troll on one of the so-called "hidden" forums for all to see and admire. This way, you get to bask in the praise of other trolls, they get to contribute to your's if they want to, and you get an easy way to find the troll later on when you want to check on its progress :)As for when to post it, that's a matter of opinion really. You can either post it straight away or leave it will after people start biting. Remember that the troll forum is also frequented by non-trolls, and sometimes you may get a self-declared "troll-buster" try and expose you. But remember,
/.ers always post before thinking, and often it doesn't matter at all.There is no real current forum at the moment thanks to various spammers hitting the sids, but try trolltalk, the original troll sid started by 80md and osm way back in the day. Generally all postings are done there as an AC, with your name at the end of the post. Include a link to the troll somewhere in the text, which ideally will be directly to the post and its replies - click on the #XX link in the thread to get there.
- Ending the troll
Sometimes you just get bored with a troll, or people start posting genuinely thoughtful stuff in reply (it does happen). When this happens it might be time to own up to the troll with a helpful "YHBT. YHL. HAND." post. Sometimes people will carry on a discussion of the issue, and if you're really lucky (and it was a great troll) they will completely fail to believe you and carry on arguing. If that happens, pat yourself on the back for writing a great troll
:) - The cheap $3 crack
Finally, when all else fails and your troll gets moderated down to (-1, Troll) within ten seconds of you posting it, the only honourable thing to do is to accuse the moderators of smoking the cheap $3 crack (again) and give up
:(
Section 2 - Types of troll
- The Maniac
Probably the most popular kind of troll, the Maniac holds an opinion on something, and won't budge from that opinion no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented. If challenged, the Maniac will simply get more and more agitated and abusive, deriding his opponents as "idiots", "wrong-thinking", "dangerous" and "subversive". Generally the Maniac takes a position that opposes the prevalent
/. beliefs, but a similar effect can be achieved by taking a typical /. viewpoint and pushing it to ridiculous extremes.Maniacs can be crafted for practically every article
/. posts, although some are more obvious targets than others. Civil liberty articles, especially on things like censorship, DMCA, UCITA that really get /.ers riled up, are usually extremely fruitful grounds for a well-crafted maniac. The other obvious type of article is anything which could possibly involve religion, especially evolution :)Here are some fruitful avenues to explore:
- The right-wing
Always popular, the right-wing maniac (RWM) is a God-fearing, gun-toting, flag-waving American, and proud of it. They don't care about the rest of the world, unless it's to "prove" that America is better than everything else, and they cannot stand liberal whining over civil rights. They hate the moral decay of America and want it to revert into a nation of heterosexual, Christian whites like it was meant to be. Woe betide anyone that dares to suggest otherwise.
- Religion
There are two ways to approach this kind of maniac. The harder to pull off is the militant atheist, but this is quite common amongst
/. posters and you would have to be very offensive to get this to work. Of course with religion trolls, the argument can go on for ever once it's started... The more common approach is the Christian fundamentalist. They are ignorant, intolerant and bigoted in the extreme. For them the Bible is the inerrant word of God revealed to man - it contains no flaws and no contradictions. Thus they are strict Creationists - mentions of evolution or cosmology will set them off on vitriolic rants. Flaming denunciations of anyone daring to contradict the "Word of God" are the way to go, and any kind of proof can always be ignored by appealing to "secular humanist brainwashing". And let's not forget, the USA is the greatest nation on Earth because it has the righteous power of Jesus Christ behind it. - Ideology
Pick a philosophy, any philosophy. This troll is a troll with a cause - they have found some kind of ideological truth, and are out to expose every other philosophy as a sham. Whether it be libertarianism, objectivism, communism or capitalism, this troll will point out the obvious "flaws" in any other philosophies, whilst spouting dogma about their own. And the best thing is - you don't even need to know that much about what you're spouting - making doctrinaire mistakes will get both sides of the argument flaming you, adding to the fun.
- Software
This is an old favourite and crops up in many forms, covering the gamut from OS maniacs (Linux zealots, MS-apologists or embittered BSD fanatics), language maniacs (Pascal vs. C, C vs. C++, C++ vs. Java, Perl vs. Python, VB vs. everything), application maniacs(GIMP vs. Photoshop, Netscape vs. IE, vi vs. emacs) and also includes people who complain about how technology should only be for the 31337 hackers.
- Guns
Americans love their guns, and will always fight passionately for their Constitutionally guarenteed rights to bear arms and shoot people. Even the slightest hint of criticism of this will bring down the wrath of a thousand and one enraged gun-owners on you, so it's always a great point to work into a troll
:)
- The right-wing
- The Expert
The Expert is someone who is "savvy" in their particular field, and is perfectly willing to give their opinion on any topic even vauguely related to their field. The Expert is most likely to be from a field which
/.ers as a rule despise - the classic example is dumb marketing guy, but try consultants, lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, executives, journalists (just think Jon Katz). With this kind of troll sweeping statements with little content are the norm, along wire dire portents of future catastrophe and dark hints of "insider knowledge".Some possible angles to exploit:
- Industry knowledge
The expert knows the computing industry from the inside - as a long-term pro, they can dispense knowledge knowing that they can "speak for the industry". Their smug self-satisfaction is bound to annoy, as is any suggestion that things aren't the way that
/.ers would like it - saying "Linux requires the rock-solid guarantee of a trusted company like Microsoft" or "Apache cannot be trusted for mission-critical enterprise platforms" is guaranteed to get you denials explaining exactly why you're wrong, in excruciating detail. - Helpful hints
With their tech-savvy (or law-savvy or whatever) experience, the expert is obviously the best person to point out what's wrong with things or to give out useful "factual" information. In fact this probably works best with lawyer trolls - for all that
/.ers protest "IANAL", they certainly seem to think they could be, and any mistakes you make will send them rushing to prove themselves by correcting you.
- Industry knowledge
- Offtopic Trolls
Not really a "troll" in the strict Jargon File sense of the word, but they certainly should be included here
:) This category includes parodies, offtopic weirdness any all kinds of amusing stuff. Not really my area of expertise, this stuff is mainly done by gnarphlager and opensourceman. Thanks to gnarphlager for this section.Offtopic trolls, like any other, come in almost as many colours as an iMac, but generally not as cute. But then again, a good offtopic "troll" can affect more people than a repulsive little gumdrop on your desk, because you need to have someone SEE your desk before they can react. Simple? Moreso than even my overblown prose could indicate. Some basic examples:
- The serial troll
Write a story. Keep expanding it. It doesn't matter what article you post it under, so long as it's high up. If you want people to recognize you, pick a couple themes or symbols, and carry them on throughout the story. Other alternatives include back linking or including the entire story, but adding more each time. Be funny if you want. Or if you don't feel like being funny, just be really weird. Someone will react.
- The random troll
This has nothing to do with anything. Be it a stream of consciousness rant, or a description of the corner of your desk. Another favorite is a monologue, read as if spoken from any one given entity to another. The more outlandish, the better (a pair of socks talking to a mousepad, for example). If you really wanted to be artsy, work in an actual metaphor or legitimate meaning behind it, but it's not necessary.
- The vaguely related troll
Start out with a comment about the article. Have a definite opinion of it. Then, after a little while, disintegrate into randomness. All roads eventually can eventually lead to cheese (yum), Natalie Portman, cannibalism, toasters, squirrels, futons, you name it. All it takes is a little bit of creativity. Oh, and feel free to use other trolls' motifs. Open source and all that
;-)
General tips:
- If it's funny for a fleeting moment, then it's worth posting.
- Puns. Puns are only less vile than mimes, but it's hard to mime on
/. So feel free/obligated to litter your offtopic and random bits with puns. Hurt the bastards. And if they're sick enough to laugh at them, then they'll eventually end up here ;-) - Obscure cultural references and injokes are always good. SOMEONE will get them eventually.
- Several drafts of a serial or random post are common, but true elegance is being able to come up with something on the spot that still makes the top 40 posts (on a post-heavy article)
- The serial troll
Section 3 - Useful trolling links
The following links contain background information useful for trolls needing quick quotes and "expert" opinions to include.
- General purpose links
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html - How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
:) - www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.htm
l - A List Of Fallacious Arguments - Learn them and use them liberally - www.altairiv.demon.co.uk/troll/trollfaq.html - USENET troll HOWTO
- www.baiting.org - Baiting.org
- www.fieldingtravel.com/df/index.htm - Fielding's DangerFinder - A guide to what and where's dangerous
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html - How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
- Religious links
- www.godhatesamerica.com/ - God Hates America
- www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html - The Creed of Christian Reconstruction
- www.demonbuster.com - How to cast out your demons and do spiritual warfare
- riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/th
i ngs.htm - Things Creationists hate - www.icr.org/ - Institute for Creation Research
- www.xenu.net - Operation Clambake - The fight against Scientology on the net
- www.hom.net/~angels/ - Citizens for the Ten Commandments
- www.bju.edu/rcnbc.html - The difference between Catholics and Christians
- www.geocities.com/prazske00/biblequotes.html - Bible quotes by category
- Political/economy links
- www.aynrand.org - The Ayn Rand Institute
- www.reason.com - Libertarian site
- www.freerepublic.com - Right-wing stuff
- www.jbs.org - Excellent site for all kinds of right-wingery
- www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html - Web economy bullshit generator
- Crackpot science links
- www.fixedearth.com - The Earth Is Not Moving
- www.jir.com/index.htm - The Journal of Irreproducible Results
- Timing
-
Moderator (Offtopic, but Merry Xmas!) <--WRONG!The
/. troll HOWTOThis is version 0.6 of a troll HOWTO, sort of a companion piece to jsm's excellent troll FAQ. As a draft, comments and criticism are always welcome, if not appreciated
Section 1 - Trolling techniques :)There are techniques used by successful trolls to elicit the maximum amount of responses from unthinking
/.ers. This section is dedicated to explaining how to use these in the course of your trolls. Remember though, a great troll can break any or all of these and still be successful...- Timing
Because you're posting as an AC, your troll will generally be ignored in favour of posters using their accounts, and so getting in early is essential. A good guideline is to get into the first 20 posts, so that people reading the article will see the troll before it is swamped out. One way of increasing the speed with which you get your troll into play is to prepare them beforehand, and then quickly customise them for the current article. This is easier than it sounds since
/. typically repeats stories with small variations and runs lots of similar stories.Note that this is why Jon Katz stories are pretty worthless as trolling material - by the time you've found the article and prepared a troll there's already 50+ posts on it, most of them flaming Jon Katz anyway
:) - Exposure
Once you've got your troll in, you need people to actually read it. You also want replies -
/.ers are more likely to read your troll if it starts a large thread. You also want to remember that some people have set their comment thresholds to values higher than 0 - to get the attention of these you either want to get your post moderated up (see Style, below) or get a reply which gets moderated up to 4 or 5, in which case your troll becomes visible to all. - Accounts
An alternative to the time-honoured tradition of AC trolling is that of creating a "troll" account. This gives you the advantage of posting at 1 rather than 0, and slashbots are more likely to take you seriously, especially if you at least sound reasonable. If you do this, try to avoid posting stuff where it is obvious you're a troll under the account - post it anoymously instead - some slightly more canny readers actually check your user info before they reply. Not many though
:)The ultimate goal of the troll account is to secure the +1 bonus, which is currently received once you hit 26 points of Karma. To get there, employ the techniques of karma whoring that we see every day on
/. and watch the karma roll in. And of course once you get the +1 bonus, the world is your oyster in terms of /. Posts made at a default of 2 hit even those people with the threshold of 2, are more likely to get moderated up even further if they are at all coherent, and people tend to lose their critical thinking abilities in the face of the +1 bonus. Milk it for all it's worth. - Layout
To get people reading it a troll needs to be easily readable. Make sure you break it down into easily digestible paragraphs, use HTML tags where appropriate (but always make sure you close them properly) and use whitespace appropriately.
- Size
Generally a troll shouldn't be too short, otherwise it'll get lost in the crowd. A workable minimum is a couple of medium paragraphs. Conversely, it shouldn't be too long, or no-one will bother to read it. Keep it to a happy medium.
- Spelling
Whilst spelling is important if you want the troll to be taken "seriously", key spelling mistakes can draw out the spelling zealots, especially if you mis-spell the name of a venerated
/. hero, like Linus Torveldes or Richard Strawlman (thanks dmg). Related to this is the use of the wrong word, explaining an acronym as being something it isn't or making a word into an acronym even when it isn't. - Subject
The subject line needs to draw attention to your post without making it obvious that it is a troll. A simple statement of the main point of your argument can work here.
- Style
Once you realise that most moderators don't bother to read past the first paragraph or two, you can use this fact to craft trolls that can be moderated up as "Insightful" (note that I mean this in the
/. sense rather than the real-world sense). Start off fairly reasonable, making statements that are /. friendly and not being too controversial. As the troll goes on, make it more and more controversial, building it up for the coup de grace in the final paragraph. - Linking
As we all know, a post with links is considered "informative" by the
/. crowd. Moderators love it, and they rarely check the links, so be sure to include as many as possible. And make them wrong - a link to the Perl website should instead point to the Python website instead, and vice versa. The other alternative to incorrect links is "useful" links to places like www.linux.org and www.microsoft.com i.e. places /.ers could never have found on their own :) - Feeding
The ideal troll requires no feeding - it runs on its own, generating flamewars between clueless
/.ers for your amusement. But often a troll requires some help and so you should consider feeding it. Feeding is best reserved for people making either completely clueless responses, people making responses with holes in, or those wonderful people who write a 2000-word point-by-point rebuttal of your troll. - Know your audience
Always keep in mind the kind of things advocated on
/. so that you can play on and against them. This is why anti-Linux, creationist, gun-loving, pro-corporation trolls work well - the vast majority of /.ers hold the opposite viewpoints. And if a few people agree with you, so much the better - it merely validates your viewpoint in the eyes of readers. - Arrogance
Be arrogant. You, as a troll, know that you're right. No other explanation could exist. The wronger the "fact", the more assertively you should state it. Make it clear that you are better than everyone else - you know the truth and they are just too stupid to realise it. Use plenty of sarcasm, and use "quotes" to show it to people too dumb to realise.
- Offensiveness
Being offensive in your initial troll can be counter-productive - it causes moderators to mark you down as flamebait in general. But if you're feeding, then you can get away with calling
/.ers all kinds of things. Make broad generalisations about /. readers - call them "long-haired Linux zealots", "socialist open-source bigots" or whatever. Stereotyping is encouraged - people always want to think that they're an individual, and will point this out to you given half a chance. - Indifference
Great for articles with a political or social bent, this kind of troll expresses complete indifference to the topic at hand, wondering who on Earth cares about it. An alternative method is to say that the topic only concerns a certain group of people - criminals, idiots, hackers (always use this instead of crackers) or whatever group you want to offend.
- Sympathy
Appear to take the same stance as the people you're trying to troll - claim you're as much a fan of Linux as the next man, but... This way you can make all kinds of claims in the sure knowledge that you actually know what you're talking about. A great phrase to use here is "In my experience". Remember to act like all the things you're pointing out are unfortunate but true.
- The common touch
Always accuse
/.ers of being elitist. This is an easy thing to do seeing as a lot of them are. Claim that is their grandmother couldn't use it, then they are just into it to feel better than Joe Sixpack rather than "doing it for the average user". This is always great for working into anti-Linux trolls - attack command-line tools and poorly designed desktops. - The 31337 touch
The opposite of the above. Claim that technology or whatever is only for the elite of society and that any attempt to open it up for everyone is wrong, an attack on intellectualism and possibly even dangerous. If people were meant to understand these things then they would, and it's their fault if they're too stupid to learn.
- Contradiction
Never be afraid to contradict yourself, even in the space of a single sentence. The phrases "I am a top programmer who codes in VB" or "I am a supporter of open source who uses NT at work and 95 at home" will be sure to get a response from some weenie smugly pointing out the contradiction. Confuse the issue more by engaging in contradiction when you are feeding - this will confuse
/.ers who will then make even more stupid replies, leaving them even more wide open for response.Clues
If you're feeling brave, give the reader clues that this is an obvious troll. The classic example here is dmg's stock phrase "I am often accused of trolling (whatever that is)", but also feel free to use phrases like "I have not read the article, and I don't know much about XYZ but I feel I must comment". If anyone responds to a troll with these kinds of clues in it, feel free to bask in the glow of knee-jerk
/. responses. - Denial
If you're unlucky someone will accuse you of being a troll (surely not!) and try and ruin it for you. If you don't want it all to end there, then be sure to counter it by accusing them of being small-minded and petty, saying that it's easier for them to say it's a troll than to accept that people have different opinions. Be sure to say this in the subject line, especially if their subject was the infamous "YHBT. YHL. HAND."
- Claiming credit
Given that
/. has its community of regular trolls (hi guys!), it's only polite to publish your troll on one of the so-called "hidden" forums for all to see and admire. This way, you get to bask in the praise of other trolls, they get to contribute to your's if they want to, and you get an easy way to find the troll later on when you want to check on its progress :)As for when to post it, that's a matter of opinion really. You can either post it straight away or leave it will after people start biting. Remember that the troll forum is also frequented by non-trolls, and sometimes you may get a self-declared "troll-buster" try and expose you. But remember,
/.ers always post before thinking, and often it doesn't matter at all.There is no real current forum at the moment thanks to various spammers hitting the sids, but try trolltalk, the original troll sid started by 80md and osm way back in the day. Generally all postings are done there as an AC, with your name at the end of the post. Include a link to the troll somewhere in the text, which ideally will be directly to the post and its replies - click on the #XX link in the thread to get there.
- Ending the troll
Sometimes you just get bored with a troll, or people start posting genuinely thoughtful stuff in reply (it does happen). When this happens it might be time to own up to the troll with a helpful "YHBT. YHL. HAND." post. Sometimes people will carry on a discussion of the issue, and if you're really lucky (and it was a great troll) they will completely fail to believe you and carry on arguing. If that happens, pat yourself on the back for writing a great troll
:) - The cheap $3 crack
Finally, when all else fails and your troll gets moderated down to (-1, Troll) within ten seconds of you posting it, the only honourable thing to do is to accuse the moderators of smoking the cheap $3 crack (again) and give up
:(
- The Maniac
Probably the most popular kind of troll, the Maniac holds an opinion on something, and won't budge from that opinion no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented. If challenged, the Maniac will simply get more and more agitated and abusive, deriding his opponents as "idiots", "wrong-thinking", "dangerous" and "subversive". Generally the Maniac takes a position that opposes the prevalent
/. beliefs, but a similar effect can be achieved by taking a typical /. viewpoint and pushing it to ridiculous extremes.Maniacs can be crafted for practically every article
/. posts, although some are more obvious targets than others. Civil liberty articles, especially on things like censorship, DMCA, UCITA that really get /.ers riled up, are usually extremely fruitful grounds for a well-crafted maniac. The other obvious type of article is anything which could possibly involve religion, especially evolution :)Here are some fruitful avenues to explore:
- The Right-Wing Maniac
Always popular, the right-wing maniac (RWM) is a God-fearing, gun-toting, flag-waving American, and proud of it. They don't care about the rest of the world, unless it's to "prove" that America is better than everything else, and they cannot stand liberal whining over civil rights. They hate the moral decay of America and want it to revert into a nation of heterosexual, Christian whites like it was meant to be. Woe betide anyone that dares to suggest otherwise.
- Religion
There are two ways to approach this kind of maniac. The harder to pull off is the militant atheist, but this is quite common amongst
/. posters and you would have to be very offensive to get this to work. Of course with religion trolls, the argument can go on for ever once it's started... The more common approach is the Christian fundamentalist. They are ignorant, intolerant and bigoted in the extreme. For them the Bible is the inerrant word of God revealed to man - it contains no flaws and no contradictions. Thus they are strict Creationists - mentions of evolution or cosmology will set them off on vitriolic rants. Flaming denunciations of anyone daring to contradict the "Word of God" are the way to go, and any kind of proof can always be ignored by appealing to "secular humanist brainwashing". And let's not forget, the USA is the greatest nation on Earth because it has the righteous power of Jesus Christ behind it. - Ideology
Pick a philosophy, any philosophy. This troll is a troll with a cause - they have found some kind of ideological truth, and are out to expose every other philosophy as a sham. Whether it be libertarianism, objectivism, communism or capitalism, this troll will point out the obvious "flaws" in any other philosophies, whilst spouting dogma about their own. And the best thing is - you don't even need to know that much about what you're spouting - making doctrinaire mistakes will get both sides of the argument flaming you, adding to the fun.
- Software
This is an old favourite and crops up in many forms, covering the gamut from OS maniacs (Linux zealots, MS-apologists or embittered BSD fanatics), language maniacs (Pascal vs. C, C vs. C++, C++ vs. Java, Perl vs. Python, VB vs. everything), application maniacs(GIMP vs. Photoshop, Netscape vs. IE, vi vs. emacs) and also includes people who complain about how technology should only be for the 31337 hackers.
- Guns
Americans love their guns, and will always fight passionately for their Constitutionally guarenteed rights to bear arms and shoot people. Even the slightest hint of criticism of this will bring down the wrath of a thousand and one enraged gun-owners on you, so it's always a great point to work into a troll
:)
- The Right-Wing Maniac
- The Expert
The Expert is someone who is "savvy" in their particular field, and is perfectly willing to give their opinion on any topic even vauguely related to their field. The Expert is most likely to be from a field which
/.ers as a rule despise - the classic example is dumb marketing guy, but try consultants, lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, executives, journalists (just think Jon Katz). With this kind of troll sweeping statements with little content are the norm, along wire dire portents of future catastrophe and dark hints of "insider knowledge".Some possible angles to exploit:
- Industry knowledge
The expert knows the computing industry from the inside - as a long-term pro, they can dispense knowledge knowing that they can "speak for the industry". Their smug self-satisfaction is bound to annoy, as is any suggestion that things aren't the way that
/.ers would like it - saying "Linux requires the rock-solid guarantee of a trusted company like Microsoft" or "Apache cannot be trusted for mission-critical enterprise platforms" is guaranteed to get you denials explaining exactly why you're wrong, in excruciating detail. - Helpful hints
With their tech-savvy (or law-savvy or whatever) experience, the expert is obviously the best person to point out what's wrong with things or to give out useful "factual" information. In fact this probably works best with lawyer trolls - for all that
/.ers protest "IANAL", they certainly seem to think they could be, and any mistakes you make will send them rushing to prove themselves by correcting you.
- Industry knowledge
- Offtopic Trolls
Not really a "troll" in the strict Jargon File sense of the word, but they certainly should be included here
:) This category includes parodies, offtopic weirdness any all kinds of amusing stuff. Not really my area of expertise, this stuff is mainly done by gnarphlager and opensourceman. Thanks to gnarphlager for this section.Offtopic trolls, like any other, come in almost as many colours as an iMac, but generally not as cute. But then again, a good offtopic "troll" can affect more people than a repulsive little gumdrop on your desk, because you need to have someone SEE your desk before they can react. Simple? Moreso than even my overblown prose could indicate. Some basic examples:
- The serial troll
Write a story. Keep expanding it. It doesn't matter what article you post it under, so long as it's high up. If you want people to recognize you, pick a couple themes or symbols, and carry them on throughout the story. Other alternatives include back linking or including the entire story, but adding more each time. Be funny if you want. Or if you don't feel like being funny, just be really weird. Someone will react.
- The random troll
This has nothing to do with anything. Be it a stream of consciousness rant, or a description of the corner of your desk. Another favorite is a monologue, read as if spoken from any one given entity to another. The more outlandish, the better (a pair of socks talking to a mousepad, for example). If you really wanted to be artsy, work in an actual metaphor or legitimate meaning behind it, but it's not necessary.
- The vaguely related troll
Start out with a comment about the article. Have a definite opinion of it. Then, after a little while, disintegrate into randomness. All roads eventually can eventually lead to cheese (yum), Natalie Portman, cannibalism, toasters, squirrels, futons, you name it. All it takes is a little bit of creativity. Oh, and feel free to use other trolls' motifs. Open source and all that
;-)
General tips:
- If it's funny for a fleeting moment, then it's worth posting.
- Puns. Puns are only less vile than mimes, but it's hard to mime on
/. So feel free/obligated to litter your offtopic and random bits with puns. Hurt the bastards. And if they're sick enough to laugh at them, then they'll eventually end up here ;-) - Obscure cultural references and injokes are always good. SOMEONE will get them eventually.
- Several drafts of a serial or random post are common, but true elegance is being able to come up with something on the spot that still makes the top 40 posts (on a post-heavy article)
- The serial troll
The following links contain background information useful for trolls needing quick quotes and "expert" opinions to include.
- General purpose links
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html
- How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
:) - www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.htm
l - A List Of Fallacious Arguments - Learn them and use them liberally - www.altairiv.demon.co.uk/troll/trollfaq.html - USENET troll HOWTO
- www.baiting.org - Baiting.org
- www.fieldingtravel.com/df/index.htm - Fielding's DangerFinder - A guide to what and where's dangerous
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html
- How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
- Religious links
- www.godhatesamerica.com/ - God Hates America
- www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html - The Creed of Christian Reconstruction
- www.demonbuster.com - How to cast out your demons and do spiritual warfare
- riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/th
i ngs.htm - Things Creationists hate - www.icr.org/ - Institute for Creation Research
- www.xenu.net - Operation Clambake - The fight against Scientology on the net
- www.hom.net/~angels/ - Citizens for the Ten Commandments
- www.bju.edu/rcnbc.html - The difference between Catholics and Christians
- www.geocities.com/prazske00/biblequotes.html - Bible quotes by category
- Political/economy links
- www.aynrand.org - The Ayn Rand Institute
- www.reason.com - Libertarian site
- www.freerepublic.com - Right-wing stuff
- www.jbs.org - Excellent site for all kinds of right-wingery
- www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html - Web economy bullshit generator
- Crackpot science links
- www.fixedearth.com - The Earth Is Not Moving
- www.jir.com/index.htm - The Journal of Irreproducible Results
© spiralx, I did not write this
;) - Timing
-
/. Troll HOWTO <-- WRONG!!!!!The
/. troll HOWTOThis is version 0.6 of a troll HOWTO, sort of a companion piece to jsm's excellent troll FAQ. As a draft, comments and criticism are always welcome, if not appreciated
Section 1 - Trolling techniques :)There are techniques used by successful trolls to elicit the maximum amount of responses from unthinking
/.ers. This section is dedicated to explaining how to use these in the course of your trolls. Remember though, a great troll can break any or all of these and still be successful...- Timing
Because you're posting as an AC, your troll will generally be ignored in favour of posters using their accounts, and so getting in early is essential. A good guideline is to get into the first 20 posts, so that people reading the article will see the troll before it is swamped out. One way of increasing the speed with which you get your troll into play is to prepare them beforehand, and then quickly customise them for the current article. This is easier than it sounds since
/. typically repeats stories with small variations and runs lots of similar stories.Note that this is why Jon Katz stories are pretty worthless as trolling material - by the time you've found the article and prepared a troll there's already 50+ posts on it, most of them flaming Jon Katz anyway
:) - Exposure
Once you've got your troll in, you need people to actually read it. You also want replies -
/.ers are more likely to read your troll if it starts a large thread. You also want to remember that some people have set their comment thresholds to values higher than 0 - to get the attention of these you either want to get your post moderated up (see Style, below) or get a reply which gets moderated up to 4 or 5, in which case your troll becomes visible to all. - Accounts
An alternative to the time-honoured tradition of AC trolling is that of creating a "troll" account. This gives you the advantage of posting at 1 rather than 0, and slashbots are more likely to take you seriously, especially if you at least sound reasonable. If you do this, try to avoid posting stuff where it is obvious you're a troll under the account - post it anoymously instead - some slightly more canny readers actually check your user info before they reply. Not many though
:)The ultimate goal of the troll account is to secure the +1 bonus, which is currently received once you hit 26 points of Karma. To get there, employ the techniques of karma whoring that we see every day on
/. and watch the karma roll in. And of course once you get the +1 bonus, the world is your oyster in terms of /. Posts made at a default of 2 hit even those people with the threshold of 2, are more likely to get moderated up even further if they are at all coherent, and people tend to lose their critical thinking abilities in the face of the +1 bonus. Milk it for all it's worth. - Layout
To get people reading it a troll needs to be easily readable. Make sure you break it down into easily digestible paragraphs, use HTML tags where appropriate (but always make sure you close them properly) and use whitespace appropriately.
- Size
Generally a troll shouldn't be too short, otherwise it'll get lost in the crowd. A workable minimum is a couple of medium paragraphs. Conversely, it shouldn't be too long, or no-one will bother to read it. Keep it to a happy medium.
- Spelling
Whilst spelling is important if you want the troll to be taken "seriously", key spelling mistakes can draw out the spelling zealots, especially if you mis-spell the name of a venerated
/. hero, like Linus Torveldes or Richard Strawlman (thanks dmg). Related to this is the use of the wrong word, explaining an acronym as being something it isn't or making a word into an acronym even when it isn't. - Subject
The subject line needs to draw attention to your post without making it obvious that it is a troll. A simple statement of the main point of your argument can work here.
- Style
Once you realise that most moderators don't bother to read past the first paragraph or two, you can use this fact to craft trolls that can be moderated up as "Insightful" (note that I mean this in the
/. sense rather than the real-world sense). Start off fairly reasonable, making statements that are /. friendly and not being too controversial. As the troll goes on, make it more and more controversial, building it up for the coup de grace in the final paragraph. - Linking
As we all know, a post with links is considered "informative" by the
/. crowd. Moderators love it, and they rarely check the links, so be sure to include as many as possible. And make them wrong - a link to the Perl website should instead point to the Python website instead, and vice versa. The other alternative to incorrect links is "useful" links to places like www.linux.org and www.microsoft.com i.e. places /.ers could never have found on their own :) - Feeding
The ideal troll requires no feeding - it runs on its own, generating flamewars between clueless
/.ers for your amusement. But often a troll requires some help and so you should consider feeding it. Feeding is best reserved for people making either completely clueless responses, people making responses with holes in, or those wonderful people who write a 2000-word point-by-point rebuttal of your troll. - Know your audience
Always keep in mind the kind of things advocated on
/. so that you can play on and against them. This is why anti-Linux, creationist, gun-loving, pro-corporation trolls work well - the vast majority of /.ers hold the opposite viewpoints. And if a few people agree with you, so much the better - it merely validates your viewpoint in the eyes of readers. - Arrogance
Be arrogant. You, as a troll, know that you're right. No other explanation could exist. The wronger the "fact", the more assertively you should state it. Make it clear that you are better than everyone else - you know the truth and they are just too stupid to realise it. Use plenty of sarcasm, and use "quotes" to show it to people too dumb to realise.
- Offensiveness
Being offensive in your initial troll can be counter-productive - it causes moderators to mark you down as flamebait in general. But if you're feeding, then you can get away with calling
/.ers all kinds of things. Make broad generalisations about /. readers - call them "long-haired Linux zealots", "socialist open-source bigots" or whatever. Stereotyping is encouraged - people always want to think that they're an individual, and will point this out to you given half a chance. - Indifference
Great for articles with a political or social bent, this kind of troll expresses complete indifference to the topic at hand, wondering who on Earth cares about it. An alternative method is to say that the topic only concerns a certain group of people - criminals, idiots, hackers (always use this instead of crackers) or whatever group you want to offend.
- Sympathy
Appear to take the same stance as the people you're trying to troll - claim you're as much a fan of Linux as the next man, but... This way you can make all kinds of claims in the sure knowledge that you actually know what you're talking about. A great phrase to use here is "In my experience". Remember to act like all the things you're pointing out are unfortunate but true.
- The common touch
Always accuse
/.ers of being elitist. This is an easy thing to do seeing as a lot of them are. Claim that is their grandmother couldn't use it, then they are just into it to feel better than Joe Sixpack rather than "doing it for the average user". This is always great for working into anti-Linux trolls - attack command-line tools and poorly designed desktops. - The 31337 touch
The opposite of the above. Claim that technology or whatever is only for the elite of society and that any attempt to open it up for everyone is wrong, an attack on intellectualism and possibly even dangerous. If people were meant to understand these things then they would, and it's their fault if they're too stupid to learn.
- Contradiction
Never be afraid to contradict yourself, even in the space of a single sentence. The phrases "I am a top programmer who codes in VB" or "I am a supporter of open source who uses NT at work and 95 at home" will be sure to get a response from some weenie smugly pointing out the contradiction. Confuse the issue more by engaging in contradiction when you are feeding - this will confuse
/.ers who will then make even more stupid replies, leaving them even more wide open for response.Clues
If you're feeling brave, give the reader clues that this is an obvious troll. The classic example here is dmg's stock phrase "I am often accused of trolling (whatever that is)", but also feel free to use phrases like "I have not read the article, and I don't know much about XYZ but I feel I must comment". If anyone responds to a troll with these kinds of clues in it, feel free to bask in the glow of knee-jerk
/. responses. - Denial
If you're unlucky someone will accuse you of being a troll (surely not!) and try and ruin it for you. If you don't want it all to end there, then be sure to counter it by accusing them of being small-minded and petty, saying that it's easier for them to say it's a troll than to accept that people have different opinions. Be sure to say this in the subject line, especially if their subject was the infamous "YHBT. YHL. HAND."
- Claiming credit
Given that
/. has its community of regular trolls (hi guys!), it's only polite to publish your troll on one of the so-called "hidden" forums for all to see and admire. This way, you get to bask in the praise of other trolls, they get to contribute to your's if they want to, and you get an easy way to find the troll later on when you want to check on its progress :)As for when to post it, that's a matter of opinion really. You can either post it straight away or leave it will after people start biting. Remember that the troll forum is also frequented by non-trolls, and sometimes you may get a self-declared "troll-buster" try and expose you. But remember,
/.ers always post before thinking, and often it doesn't matter at all.There is no real current forum at the moment thanks to various spammers hitting the sids, but try trolltalk, the original troll sid started by 80md and osm way back in the day. Generally all postings are done there as an AC, with your name at the end of the post. Include a link to the troll somewhere in the text, which ideally will be directly to the post and its replies - click on the #XX link in the thread to get there.
- Ending the troll
Sometimes you just get bored with a troll, or people start posting genuinely thoughtful stuff in reply (it does happen). When this happens it might be time to own up to the troll with a helpful "YHBT. YHL. HAND." post. Sometimes people will carry on a discussion of the issue, and if you're really lucky (and it was a great troll) they will completely fail to believe you and carry on arguing. If that happens, pat yourself on the back for writing a great troll
:) - The cheap $3 crack
Finally, when all else fails and your troll gets moderated down to (-1, Troll) within ten seconds of you posting it, the only honourable thing to do is to accuse the moderators of smoking the cheap $3 crack (again) and give up
:(
- The Maniac
Probably the most popular kind of troll, the Maniac holds an opinion on something, and won't budge from that opinion no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented. If challenged, the Maniac will simply get more and more agitated and abusive, deriding his opponents as "idiots", "wrong-thinking", "dangerous" and "subversive". Generally the Maniac takes a position that opposes the prevalent
/. beliefs, but a similar effect can be achieved by taking a typical /. viewpoint and pushing it to ridiculous extremes.Maniacs can be crafted for practically every article
/. posts, although some are more obvious targets than others. Civil liberty articles, especially on things like censorship, DMCA, UCITA that really get /.ers riled up, are usually extremely fruitful grounds for a well-crafted maniac. The other obvious type of article is anything which could possibly involve religion, especially evolution :)Here are some fruitful avenues to explore:
- The Right-Wing Maniac
Always popular, the right-wing maniac (RWM) is a God-fearing, gun-toting, flag-waving American, and proud of it. They don't care about the rest of the world, unless it's to "prove" that America is better than everything else, and they cannot stand liberal whining over civil rights. They hate the moral decay of America and want it to revert into a nation of heterosexual, Christian whites like it was meant to be. Woe betide anyone that dares to suggest otherwise.
- Religion
There are two ways to approach this kind of maniac. The harder to pull off is the militant atheist, but this is quite common amongst
/. posters and you would have to be very offensive to get this to work. Of course with religion trolls, the argument can go on for ever once it's started... The more common approach is the Christian fundamentalist. They are ignorant, intolerant and bigoted in the extreme. For them the Bible is the inerrant word of God revealed to man - it contains no flaws and no contradictions. Thus they are strict Creationists - mentions of evolution or cosmology will set them off on vitriolic rants. Flaming denunciations of anyone daring to contradict the "Word of God" are the way to go, and any kind of proof can always be ignored by appealing to "secular humanist brainwashing". And let's not forget, the USA is the greatest nation on Earth because it has the righteous power of Jesus Christ behind it. - Ideology
Pick a philosophy, any philosophy. This troll is a troll with a cause - they have found some kind of ideological truth, and are out to expose every other philosophy as a sham. Whether it be libertarianism, objectivism, communism or capitalism, this troll will point out the obvious "flaws" in any other philosophies, whilst spouting dogma about their own. And the best thing is - you don't even need to know that much about what you're spouting - making doctrinaire mistakes will get both sides of the argument flaming you, adding to the fun.
- Software
This is an old favourite and crops up in many forms, covering the gamut from OS maniacs (Linux zealots, MS-apologists or embittered BSD fanatics), language maniacs (Pascal vs. C, C vs. C++, C++ vs. Java, Perl vs. Python, VB vs. everything), application maniacs(GIMP vs. Photoshop, Netscape vs. IE, vi vs. emacs) and also includes people who complain about how technology should only be for the 31337 hackers.
- Guns
Americans love their guns, and will always fight passionately for their Constitutionally guarenteed rights to bear arms and shoot people. Even the slightest hint of criticism of this will bring down the wrath of a thousand and one enraged gun-owners on you, so it's always a great point to work into a troll
:)
- The Right-Wing Maniac
- The Expert
The Expert is someone who is "savvy" in their particular field, and is perfectly willing to give their opinion on any topic even vauguely related to their field. The Expert is most likely to be from a field which
/.ers as a rule despise - the classic example is dumb marketing guy, but try consultants, lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, executives, journalists (just think Jon Katz). With this kind of troll sweeping statements with little content are the norm, along wire dire portents of future catastrophe and dark hints of "insider knowledge".Some possible angles to exploit:
- Industry knowledge
The expert knows the computing industry from the inside - as a long-term pro, they can dispense knowledge knowing that they can "speak for the industry". Their smug self-satisfaction is bound to annoy, as is any suggestion that things aren't the way that
/.ers would like it - saying "Linux requires the rock-solid guarantee of a trusted company like Microsoft" or "Apache cannot be trusted for mission-critical enterprise platforms" is guaranteed to get you denials explaining exactly why you're wrong, in excruciating detail. - Helpful hints
With their tech-savvy (or law-savvy or whatever) experience, the expert is obviously the best person to point out what's wrong with things or to give out useful "factual" information. In fact this probably works best with lawyer trolls - for all that
/.ers protest "IANAL", they certainly seem to think they could be, and any mistakes you make will send them rushing to prove themselves by correcting you.
- Industry knowledge
- Offtopic Trolls
Not really a "troll" in the strict Jargon File sense of the word, but they certainly should be included here
:) This category includes parodies, offtopic weirdness any all kinds of amusing stuff. Not really my area of expertise, this stuff is mainly done by gnarphlager and opensourceman. Thanks to gnarphlager for this section.Offtopic trolls, like any other, come in almost as many colours as an iMac, but generally not as cute. But then again, a good offtopic "troll" can affect more people than a repulsive little gumdrop on your desk, because you need to have someone SEE your desk before they can react. Simple? Moreso than even my overblown prose could indicate. Some basic examples:
- The serial troll
Write a story. Keep expanding it. It doesn't matter what article you post it under, so long as it's high up. If you want people to recognize you, pick a couple themes or symbols, and carry them on throughout the story. Other alternatives include back linking or including the entire story, but adding more each time. Be funny if you want. Or if you don't feel like being funny, just be really weird. Someone will react.
- The random troll
This has nothing to do with anything. Be it a stream of consciousness rant, or a description of the corner of your desk. Another favorite is a monologue, read as if spoken from any one given entity to another. The more outlandish, the better (a pair of socks talking to a mousepad, for example). If you really wanted to be artsy, work in an actual metaphor or legitimate meaning behind it, but it's not necessary.
- The vaguely related troll
Start out with a comment about the article. Have a definite opinion of it. Then, after a little while, disintegrate into randomness. All roads eventually can eventually lead to cheese (yum), Natalie Portman, cannibalism, toasters, squirrels, futons, you name it. All it takes is a little bit of creativity. Oh, and feel free to use other trolls' motifs. Open source and all that
;-)
General tips:
- If it's funny for a fleeting moment, then it's worth posting.
- Puns. Puns are only less vile than mimes, but it's hard to mime on
/. So feel free/obligated to litter your offtopic and random bits with puns. Hurt the bastards. And if they're sick enough to laugh at them, then they'll eventually end up here ;-) - Obscure cultural references and injokes are always good. SOMEONE will get them eventually.
- Several drafts of a serial or random post are common, but true elegance is being able to come up with something on the spot that still makes the top 40 posts (on a post-heavy article)
- The serial troll
The following links contain background information useful for trolls needing quick quotes and "expert" opinions to include.
- General purpose links
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html
- How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
:) - www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.htm
l - A List Of Fallacious Arguments - Learn them and use them liberally - www.altairiv.demon.co.uk/troll/trollfaq.html - USENET troll HOWTO
- www.baiting.org - Baiting.org
- www.fieldingtravel.com/df/index.htm - Fielding's DangerFinder - A guide to what and where's dangerous
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html
- How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
- Religious links
- www.godhatesamerica.com/ - God Hates America
- www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html - The Creed of Christian Reconstruction
- www.demonbuster.com - How to cast out your demons and do spiritual warfare
- riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/th
i ngs.htm - Things Creationists hate - www.icr.org/ - Institute for Creation Research
- www.xenu.net - Operation Clambake - The fight against Scientology on the net
- www.hom.net/~angels/ - Citizens for the Ten Commandments
- www.bju.edu/rcnbc.html - The difference between Catholics and Christians
- www.geocities.com/prazske00/biblequotes.html - Bible quotes by category
- Political/economy links
- www.aynrand.org - The Ayn Rand Institute
- www.reason.com - Libertarian site
- www.freerepublic.com - Right-wing stuff
- www.jbs.org - Excellent site for all kinds of right-wingery
- www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html - Web economy bullshit generator
- Crackpot science links
- www.fixedearth.com - The Earth Is Not Moving
- www.jir.com/index.htm - The Journal of Irreproducible Results
© spiralx, I did not write this
;) - Timing
-
/. Troll HOWTO <-- WRONG!!!!!The
/. troll HOWTOThis is version 0.6 of a troll HOWTO, sort of a companion piece to jsm's excellent troll FAQ. As a draft, comments and criticism are always welcome, if not appreciated
Section 1 - Trolling techniques :)There are techniques used by successful trolls to elicit the maximum amount of responses from unthinking
/.ers. This section is dedicated to explaining how to use these in the course of your trolls. Remember though, a great troll can break any or all of these and still be successful...- Timing
Because you're posting as an AC, your troll will generally be ignored in favour of posters using their accounts, and so getting in early is essential. A good guideline is to get into the first 20 posts, so that people reading the article will see the troll before it is swamped out. One way of increasing the speed with which you get your troll into play is to prepare them beforehand, and then quickly customise them for the current article. This is easier than it sounds since
/. typically repeats stories with small variations and runs lots of similar stories.Note that this is why Jon Katz stories are pretty worthless as trolling material - by the time you've found the article and prepared a troll there's already 50+ posts on it, most of them flaming Jon Katz anyway
:) - Exposure
Once you've got your troll in, you need people to actually read it. You also want replies -
/.ers are more likely to read your troll if it starts a large thread. You also want to remember that some people have set their comment thresholds to values higher than 0 - to get the attention of these you either want to get your post moderated up (see Style, below) or get a reply which gets moderated up to 4 or 5, in which case your troll becomes visible to all. - Accounts
An alternative to the time-honoured tradition of AC trolling is that of creating a "troll" account. This gives you the advantage of posting at 1 rather than 0, and slashbots are more likely to take you seriously, especially if you at least sound reasonable. If you do this, try to avoid posting stuff where it is obvious you're a troll under the account - post it anoymously instead - some slightly more canny readers actually check your user info before they reply. Not many though
:)The ultimate goal of the troll account is to secure the +1 bonus, which is currently received once you hit 26 points of Karma. To get there, employ the techniques of karma whoring that we see every day on
/. and watch the karma roll in. And of course once you get the +1 bonus, the world is your oyster in terms of /. Posts made at a default of 2 hit even those people with the threshold of 2, are more likely to get moderated up even further if they are at all coherent, and people tend to lose their critical thinking abilities in the face of the +1 bonus. Milk it for all it's worth. - Layout
To get people reading it a troll needs to be easily readable. Make sure you break it down into easily digestible paragraphs, use HTML tags where appropriate (but always make sure you close them properly) and use whitespace appropriately.
- Size
Generally a troll shouldn't be too short, otherwise it'll get lost in the crowd. A workable minimum is a couple of medium paragraphs. Conversely, it shouldn't be too long, or no-one will bother to read it. Keep it to a happy medium.
- Spelling
Whilst spelling is important if you want the troll to be taken "seriously", key spelling mistakes can draw out the spelling zealots, especially if you mis-spell the name of a venerated
/. hero, like Linus Torveldes or Richard Strawlman (thanks dmg). Related to this is the use of the wrong word, explaining an acronym as being something it isn't or making a word into an acronym even when it isn't. - Subject
The subject line needs to draw attention to your post without making it obvious that it is a troll. A simple statement of the main point of your argument can work here.
- Style
Once you realise that most moderators don't bother to read past the first paragraph or two, you can use this fact to craft trolls that can be moderated up as "Insightful" (note that I mean this in the
/. sense rather than the real-world sense). Start off fairly reasonable, making statements that are /. friendly and not being too controversial. As the troll goes on, make it more and more controversial, building it up for the coup de grace in the final paragraph. - Linking
As we all know, a post with links is considered "informative" by the
/. crowd. Moderators love it, and they rarely check the links, so be sure to include as many as possible. And make them wrong - a link to the Perl website should instead point to the Python website instead, and vice versa. The other alternative to incorrect links is "useful" links to places like www.linux.org and www.microsoft.com i.e. places /.ers could never have found on their own :) - Feeding
The ideal troll requires no feeding - it runs on its own, generating flamewars between clueless
/.ers for your amusement. But often a troll requires some help and so you should consider feeding it. Feeding is best reserved for people making either completely clueless responses, people making responses with holes in, or those wonderful people who write a 2000-word point-by-point rebuttal of your troll. - Know your audience
Always keep in mind the kind of things advocated on
/. so that you can play on and against them. This is why anti-Linux, creationist, gun-loving, pro-corporation trolls work well - the vast majority of /.ers hold the opposite viewpoints. And if a few people agree with you, so much the better - it merely validates your viewpoint in the eyes of readers. - Arrogance
Be arrogant. You, as a troll, know that you're right. No other explanation could exist. The wronger the "fact", the more assertively you should state it. Make it clear that you are better than everyone else - you know the truth and they are just too stupid to realise it. Use plenty of sarcasm, and use "quotes" to show it to people too dumb to realise.
- Offensiveness
Being offensive in your initial troll can be counter-productive - it causes moderators to mark you down as flamebait in general. But if you're feeding, then you can get away with calling
/.ers all kinds of things. Make broad generalisations about /. readers - call them "long-haired Linux zealots", "socialist open-source bigots" or whatever. Stereotyping is encouraged - people always want to think that they're an individual, and will point this out to you given half a chance. - Indifference
Great for articles with a political or social bent, this kind of troll expresses complete indifference to the topic at hand, wondering who on Earth cares about it. An alternative method is to say that the topic only concerns a certain group of people - criminals, idiots, hackers (always use this instead of crackers) or whatever group you want to offend.
- Sympathy
Appear to take the same stance as the people you're trying to troll - claim you're as much a fan of Linux as the next man, but... This way you can make all kinds of claims in the sure knowledge that you actually know what you're talking about. A great phrase to use here is "In my experience". Remember to act like all the things you're pointing out are unfortunate but true.
- The common touch
Always accuse
/.ers of being elitist. This is an easy thing to do seeing as a lot of them are. Claim that is their grandmother couldn't use it, then they are just into it to feel better than Joe Sixpack rather than "doing it for the average user". This is always great for working into anti-Linux trolls - attack command-line tools and poorly designed desktops. - The 31337 touch
The opposite of the above. Claim that technology or whatever is only for the elite of society and that any attempt to open it up for everyone is wrong, an attack on intellectualism and possibly even dangerous. If people were meant to understand these things then they would, and it's their fault if they're too stupid to learn.
- Contradiction
Never be afraid to contradict yourself, even in the space of a single sentence. The phrases "I am a top programmer who codes in VB" or "I am a supporter of open source who uses NT at work and 95 at home" will be sure to get a response from some weenie smugly pointing out the contradiction. Confuse the issue more by engaging in contradiction when you are feeding - this will confuse
/.ers who will then make even more stupid replies, leaving them even more wide open for response.Clues
If you're feeling brave, give the reader clues that this is an obvious troll. The classic example here is dmg's stock phrase "I am often accused of trolling (whatever that is)", but also feel free to use phrases like "I have not read the article, and I don't know much about XYZ but I feel I must comment". If anyone responds to a troll with these kinds of clues in it, feel free to bask in the glow of knee-jerk
/. responses. - Denial
If you're unlucky someone will accuse you of being a troll (surely not!) and try and ruin it for you. If you don't want it all to end there, then be sure to counter it by accusing them of being small-minded and petty, saying that it's easier for them to say it's a troll than to accept that people have different opinions. Be sure to say this in the subject line, especially if their subject was the infamous "YHBT. YHL. HAND."
- Claiming credit
Given that
/. has its community of regular trolls (hi guys!), it's only polite to publish your troll on one of the so-called "hidden" forums for all to see and admire. This way, you get to bask in the praise of other trolls, they get to contribute to your's if they want to, and you get an easy way to find the troll later on when you want to check on its progress :)As for when to post it, that's a matter of opinion really. You can either post it straight away or leave it will after people start biting. Remember that the troll forum is also frequented by non-trolls, and sometimes you may get a self-declared "troll-buster" try and expose you. But remember,
/.ers always post before thinking, and often it doesn't matter at all.There is no real current forum at the moment thanks to various spammers hitting the sids, but try trolltalk, the original troll sid started by 80md and osm way back in the day. Generally all postings are done there as an AC, with your name at the end of the post. Include a link to the troll somewhere in the text, which ideally will be directly to the post and its replies - click on the #XX link in the thread to get there.
- Ending the troll
Sometimes you just get bored with a troll, or people start posting genuinely thoughtful stuff in reply (it does happen). When this happens it might be time to own up to the troll with a helpful "YHBT. YHL. HAND." post. Sometimes people will carry on a discussion of the issue, and if you're really lucky (and it was a great troll) they will completely fail to believe you and carry on arguing. If that happens, pat yourself on the back for writing a great troll
:) - The cheap $3 crack
Finally, when all else fails and your troll gets moderated down to (-1, Troll) within ten seconds of you posting it, the only honourable thing to do is to accuse the moderators of smoking the cheap $3 crack (again) and give up
:(
- The Maniac
Probably the most popular kind of troll, the Maniac holds an opinion on something, and won't budge from that opinion no matter what evidence to the contrary is presented. If challenged, the Maniac will simply get more and more agitated and abusive, deriding his opponents as "idiots", "wrong-thinking", "dangerous" and "subversive". Generally the Maniac takes a position that opposes the prevalent
/. beliefs, but a similar effect can be achieved by taking a typical /. viewpoint and pushing it to ridiculous extremes.Maniacs can be crafted for practically every article
/. posts, although some are more obvious targets than others. Civil liberty articles, especially on things like censorship, DMCA, UCITA that really get /.ers riled up, are usually extremely fruitful grounds for a well-crafted maniac. The other obvious type of article is anything which could possibly involve religion, especially evolution :)Here are some fruitful avenues to explore:
- The Right-Wing Maniac
Always popular, the right-wing maniac (RWM) is a God-fearing, gun-toting, flag-waving American, and proud of it. They don't care about the rest of the world, unless it's to "prove" that America is better than everything else, and they cannot stand liberal whining over civil rights. They hate the moral decay of America and want it to revert into a nation of heterosexual, Christian whites like it was meant to be. Woe betide anyone that dares to suggest otherwise.
- Religion
There are two ways to approach this kind of maniac. The harder to pull off is the militant atheist, but this is quite common amongst
/. posters and you would have to be very offensive to get this to work. Of course with religion trolls, the argument can go on for ever once it's started... The more common approach is the Christian fundamentalist. They are ignorant, intolerant and bigoted in the extreme. For them the Bible is the inerrant word of God revealed to man - it contains no flaws and no contradictions. Thus they are strict Creationists - mentions of evolution or cosmology will set them off on vitriolic rants. Flaming denunciations of anyone daring to contradict the "Word of God" are the way to go, and any kind of proof can always be ignored by appealing to "secular humanist brainwashing". And let's not forget, the USA is the greatest nation on Earth because it has the righteous power of Jesus Christ behind it. - Ideology
Pick a philosophy, any philosophy. This troll is a troll with a cause - they have found some kind of ideological truth, and are out to expose every other philosophy as a sham. Whether it be libertarianism, objectivism, communism or capitalism, this troll will point out the obvious "flaws" in any other philosophies, whilst spouting dogma about their own. And the best thing is - you don't even need to know that much about what you're spouting - making doctrinaire mistakes will get both sides of the argument flaming you, adding to the fun.
- Software
This is an old favourite and crops up in many forms, covering the gamut from OS maniacs (Linux zealots, MS-apologists or embittered BSD fanatics), language maniacs (Pascal vs. C, C vs. C++, C++ vs. Java, Perl vs. Python, VB vs. everything), application maniacs(GIMP vs. Photoshop, Netscape vs. IE, vi vs. emacs) and also includes people who complain about how technology should only be for the 31337 hackers.
- Guns
Americans love their guns, and will always fight passionately for their Constitutionally guarenteed rights to bear arms and shoot people. Even the slightest hint of criticism of this will bring down the wrath of a thousand and one enraged gun-owners on you, so it's always a great point to work into a troll
:)
- The Right-Wing Maniac
- The Expert
The Expert is someone who is "savvy" in their particular field, and is perfectly willing to give their opinion on any topic even vauguely related to their field. The Expert is most likely to be from a field which
/.ers as a rule despise - the classic example is dumb marketing guy, but try consultants, lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, executives, journalists (just think Jon Katz). With this kind of troll sweeping statements with little content are the norm, along wire dire portents of future catastrophe and dark hints of "insider knowledge".Some possible angles to exploit:
- Industry knowledge
The expert knows the computing industry from the inside - as a long-term pro, they can dispense knowledge knowing that they can "speak for the industry". Their smug self-satisfaction is bound to annoy, as is any suggestion that things aren't the way that
/.ers would like it - saying "Linux requires the rock-solid guarantee of a trusted company like Microsoft" or "Apache cannot be trusted for mission-critical enterprise platforms" is guaranteed to get you denials explaining exactly why you're wrong, in excruciating detail. - Helpful hints
With their tech-savvy (or law-savvy or whatever) experience, the expert is obviously the best person to point out what's wrong with things or to give out useful "factual" information. In fact this probably works best with lawyer trolls - for all that
/.ers protest "IANAL", they certainly seem to think they could be, and any mistakes you make will send them rushing to prove themselves by correcting you.
- Industry knowledge
- Offtopic Trolls
Not really a "troll" in the strict Jargon File sense of the word, but they certainly should be included here
:) This category includes parodies, offtopic weirdness any all kinds of amusing stuff. Not really my area of expertise, this stuff is mainly done by gnarphlager and opensourceman. Thanks to gnarphlager for this section.Offtopic trolls, like any other, come in almost as many colours as an iMac, but generally not as cute. But then again, a good offtopic "troll" can affect more people than a repulsive little gumdrop on your desk, because you need to have someone SEE your desk before they can react. Simple? Moreso than even my overblown prose could indicate. Some basic examples:
- The serial troll
Write a story. Keep expanding it. It doesn't matter what article you post it under, so long as it's high up. If you want people to recognize you, pick a couple themes or symbols, and carry them on throughout the story. Other alternatives include back linking or including the entire story, but adding more each time. Be funny if you want. Or if you don't feel like being funny, just be really weird. Someone will react.
- The random troll
This has nothing to do with anything. Be it a stream of consciousness rant, or a description of the corner of your desk. Another favorite is a monologue, read as if spoken from any one given entity to another. The more outlandish, the better (a pair of socks talking to a mousepad, for example). If you really wanted to be artsy, work in an actual metaphor or legitimate meaning behind it, but it's not necessary.
- The vaguely related troll
Start out with a comment about the article. Have a definite opinion of it. Then, after a little while, disintegrate into randomness. All roads eventually can eventually lead to cheese (yum), Natalie Portman, cannibalism, toasters, squirrels, futons, you name it. All it takes is a little bit of creativity. Oh, and feel free to use other trolls' motifs. Open source and all that
;-)
General tips:
- If it's funny for a fleeting moment, then it's worth posting.
- Puns. Puns are only less vile than mimes, but it's hard to mime on
/. So feel free/obligated to litter your offtopic and random bits with puns. Hurt the bastards. And if they're sick enough to laugh at them, then they'll eventually end up here ;-) - Obscure cultural references and injokes are always good. SOMEONE will get them eventually.
- Several drafts of a serial or random post are common, but true elegance is being able to come up with something on the spot that still makes the top 40 posts (on a post-heavy article)
- The serial troll
The following links contain background information useful for trolls needing quick quotes and "expert" opinions to include.
- General purpose links
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html
- How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
:) - www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.htm
l - A List Of Fallacious Arguments - Learn them and use them liberally - www.altairiv.demon.co.uk/troll/trollfaq.html - USENET troll HOWTO
- www.baiting.org - Baiting.org
- www.fieldingtravel.com/df/index.htm - Fielding's DangerFinder - A guide to what and where's dangerous
- ddi.digital.net/~gandalf/trollfaq.html
- How to deal with USENET trolls - learn your enemy
- Religious links
- www.godhatesamerica.com/ - God Hates America
- www.chalcedon.edu/creed.html - The Creed of Christian Reconstruction
- www.demonbuster.com - How to cast out your demons and do spiritual warfare
- riceinfo.rice.edu/armadillo/Sciacademy/riggins/th
i ngs.htm - Things Creationists hate - www.icr.org/ - Institute for Creation Research
- www.xenu.net - Operation Clambake - The fight against Scientology on the net
- www.hom.net/~angels/ - Citizens for the Ten Commandments
- www.bju.edu/rcnbc.html - The difference between Catholics and Christians
- www.geocities.com/prazske00/biblequotes.html - Bible quotes by category
- Political/economy links
- www.aynrand.org - The Ayn Rand Institute
- www.reason.com - Libertarian site
- www.freerepublic.com - Right-wing stuff
- www.jbs.org - Excellent site for all kinds of right-wingery
- www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html - Web economy bullshit generator
- Crackpot science links
- www.fixedearth.com - The Earth Is Not Moving
- www.jir.com/index.htm - The Journal of Irreproducible Results
© spiralx, I did not write this
;) - Timing
-
"Nature" is a disgrace
"Nature" is a magazine that has one agenda, and one agenda only
.. and that is to uphold the liberal/atheist scientific dogma that their far-left political views require. This includes things like evolution, global warming, heliocentrism, etc. If you wanted the truth on this issue (and on other issues as well), you would not limit yourself to a single source of information. Somebody who is unwilling to look at all of the evidence has clearly demonstrated that they have already made up their mind and are unwilling to consider that they are wrong. -
This is not a hoax...
This is the funniest site I've seen toady. Only problem is it's not a hoax.
-
Re:a shamei guess that is a pretty good point, if I were to put myself in the reporters shoes, would I know what to ask him? i mean, it must be quite a daunting task to be faced with what is widely reguarded as the most brilliant mind of our time, and to not look like an idiot.
my escapades into physics have mainly been hawkings works, his cambridge lectures, and the most basic few college level classes... i guess if I knew I had to meet with him, i would have asked questions more along the lines of: "in your cabridge lectures you said and how does that relate to the world around us?" or get him with some really off the wall ones: "in darwins black box, some ph.d \"proved\" creationsim via what are your feelings on that" or "the people at fixedearth.com have \"proven\" that the earth is stationary via what is your gut reaction to that?"
i mean, not much better, but it would have been at least analytical thinking... pretty weak, but a stab at it... -
Re:What I don't understand...
The Big Bang, the theory that a piece of extremely dense matter about the size of a basketball spontaneously exploded to form the universe as we know it, then this universe that was devoid of life at the time spontaneously generated some form of life which eventually became us, is pretty damn silly sounding to me.
But you see, the two key words in that sentence are "to me!" A thousand years ago, the notion that the Earth was actually a relatively tiny ball of rock, an oblate spheroid rocketing at extremely high speeds around a nuclear furnace, seemed pretty damn silly sounding to a lot of people back then, too. But today it's not silly sounding at all. (Well, some people still object to it, but they are in a minority, and they are correctly ridiculed as being loonies.)
As far as we know the universe is only 1 nanosecond old and all of our memories were created as is by some alien computer as a Virtual Life experiment.
Yyyyeesssss!!!! :) Last Tuesdayism!!! :)
I have very Agnostic leanings, but following Pascal's wager (Which I believe to be an excellent model of why scientific logical people should believe in some kind of god) ..
Well, I would have to contest this. First of all, Pascal's wager does not talk about "some kind" of god, it talks about the christian god. It says "well, either the christian god exists or it doesn't .. if it doesn't, then people who don't believe in it will lose nothing, but if it does, then those people will lose everything because they'll be sent straight to hell because the Bible says so!"
Now you claim that this is an excellent model, but I would like to point out a few things:
1) It's a lousy reason to believe in a god. Basically what you're saying is "well, I choose to believe in the christian god because I'm afraid that if it really does exist, which I'm not sure, it will punish me, so to be safe I'll believe." Don't you think that an all-powerful god will be smart enough to know that people are not being sincere, and are believing just because they're playing the odds?
2) You're putting all your eggs in one basket by assuming that you're betting on the right horse. One of the problems with Pascal's Wager is that the person who puts it forward assumes that there are only two options: either the christian god exists and the christians are right, or no god exists and the atheists are right. But these are not the only two options! What if Zeus is the real god? Then both the christians who worship Yahweh and the atheists who worship nothing are screwed! If you really wanted to play it safe shouldn't you be worshipping everything from Shiva to L. Ron Hubbard? :)
As far as I'm concerned if you choose to believe in and worship the christian god, that's perfectly fine, but Pascal's Wager is simply not a very good reason for doing so. If your beliefs are sincere then that should be enough. As I've said, I'm agnostic, but I don't think that people who subscribe to one religion or another are doing so out of stupidity. And while I am tired of people trumpeting their Christianity and parading it around like the cure for cancer, I'm also tired of people attacking christians and Christianity for no reason other than the fact they don't like it.
Religious tolerance, I say :) -
people who think the earth is moving
you need to go and visit this site and learn the truth. the copernican lie has been the cornerstone for all of the bad events that have happened in recent centuries.
-
Nutty Christian Fundamentalists
Aha! But you've forgotten to put a link to this site, which conclusively refutes the Satanic view that the Earth is not the center of the Universe! After you've read through that, buy the book!
I'm fairly certain that the above post is a troll, but I've included these two links to show the truly preposterous nature of creation "science" (that is, start out with a conclusion that must be reached at all costs, and then start looking for observations that could be interpreted as supporting that conclusion, while discarding everything else that does not.) -
Parody, Parody, Parody!
Reading over all of these posts that apparently take this site seriously, I have to ask: Are you really missing the blatantly obvious parody, or are you just extending it by pretending that you think the site is genuine? Yes, there are a load of fundamentalist Christian nutballs on the 'net. This page, however, is not run by one of them, and it seems like it should be pretty obvious.