Slashdot Mirror


The Day Leo Traynor Confronted His Troll

McGruber writes "Dublin-based writer Leo Traynor has written a piece about confronting the troll who drove him off Twitter, hacked his Facebook, and abused and terrified his family. Quoting: 'I blocked the account and reported it as spam. The following week it happened again in an identical manner. A new follower, I followed back, received a string of abusive DMs, blocked and reported for spam. Two or three times a week. Sometimes two or three times a day. An almost daily cycle of blocking and reporting and intense verbal abuse. ... Then one day something happened that truly frightened me. I don't scare easily but this was vile. I received a parcel at my home address. Nothing unusual there – I get lots of post. I ripped it open and there was a Tupperware lunchbox inside full of ashes. There was a note included, saying, "Say hello to your relatives from Auschwitz." I was physically sick. ... In July I was approached by a friend who's basically an IT genius, and he offered some help. He said that he could trace the hackers and trolls for me using perfectly legal technology, which would lead to their IP addresses. I said yes. Then I baited them – I was deliberately more provocative toward them than ever I'd been before.'"

25 of 594 comments (clear)

  1. Trolling? by steppedleader · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Compared to the typical trolling found on the internet, this seems a bit more like harassment or stalking, no?

    1. Re:Trolling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm disappointed that the author didn't press charges. This kid is probably a sociopath. When he stalks and hurts other people in the future the police won't have the evidence they need of past cases. Sociopaths don't learn how to stop hurting people, they just learn not to get caught the next time.

    2. Re:Trolling? by bloodhawk · · Score: 5, Informative

      yep it isn't actually trolling at all. It seems nowadays any bad or obnoxious behaviour gets labeled with troll, I guess this is what happens when people try to use a catchy term without actually understanding what it means.

    3. Re:Trolling? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, that's insulting. Good trolling seems to be a dying art these days. A good troll post says something that sounds plausible, and encourages responses. During the thread, it becomes less and less reasonable, but the aim is to make the other person say something unreasonable first or to make them waste a large amount of effort replying. If you want to see a good troll, read some of the threads started by roman_mir.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    4. Re:Trolling? by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree with the AC. The extent of what the evil little miseryshit did proves it was not just a game to him. I'd wager his show of tears was just that- a show. His brain is miswired. There's a whole section that simply isn't working. Coulseling won't acomplish a damn thing, but he'll be able to make it look like it did.

      Sociopaths are the most manipulative people in the world. It's why the alphas go into politics. They thrive there. They are one of the three types of people in this world that you never EVER trust along with junkies and Party loyalist ideologues.

    5. Re:Trolling? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, that's insulting. Good trolling seems to be a dying art these days. A good troll post says something that sounds plausible, and encourages responses. During the thread, it becomes less and less reasonable, but the aim is to make the other person say something unreasonable first or to make them waste a large amount of effort replying. If you want to see a good troll, read some of the threads started by roman_mir.

      True, a good troll had that ring of plausibility that it triggered teh "Huh? I must respond to this..." reflex before the responder sat down and thought it through. For example:

      While Star Trek (Star Wars / Firefly / Battlestar Galactica - pick one) tried to stay true to science as much as is possible in a science fiction world where faster than light travel is the norm; they missed one big thing -> everytime a shuttle craft passed the Enterprise it cast a shadow. In a vacuum; everyone knows you don't have shadows in a vacuum.

      Of course, posting that in a Star Trek (or Mensa) group is like shooting fish in a barrel..

      Trolling isn't flaming (any idiot can flame); but unfortunately trolling has lost its original meaning much as hacker has. Nor is simply disagreeing and laying out your position; though many people are willing to yell "Troll" when they can't defend their position. AFU, in the old usenet days, was a great example of the art of trolling; unfortunately since the decline of usenet and the onset of eternal September it's a different world.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    6. Re:Trolling? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with the idea that the tears were for show was that it was deliberately kept from him that they knew he was the perpetrator. He confessed without being confronted with evidence linking him to it, or even the slightest hint that they suspected he was the perpetrator. At least that's the picture presented by the article.

      Bullshit. If a cop had you in a room and started talking about the details to a crime you committed and you 'spontaneously' confessed, you can hardly say that you didn't realize you were a suspect. This man who barely knew the kid suddenly visited him and then started showing him the details of his crime. Yet you still think the kid didn't realize that he was a suspect? Come on! The kid confessed because he figured it out and knew that manipulation was required to keep his freedom. That is all. It wasn't remorse. Sociopaths are more manipulative than you can imagine.

    7. Re:Trolling? by Psychotria · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you want to see a good troll, read some of the threads started by roman_mir.

      Not only is good trolling rare, but no one even knows what trolling is anymore! Someone isn't trolling just because they say something you disagree with. I can say with certainty that although I disagree with roman_mir, there are people who genuinely have similar 'extremist' views.

      I began to write a new comment saying pretty much the same thing as you. Since you've almost nailed it, I decided to reply to your comment instead. So, l will reiterate. Nobody knows what trolling is anymore! They don't. Being abusive is trolling. Saying something controversial isn't trolling. Trolling is leading the person to believe what you're saying or showing them, or leading them into a trap, and then, although not compulsory, making them look like a damn fool. This is quite distinct to saying something like "you're a gay horse". I dunno what a gay horse is, but let's pretend it's offensive. That example is an insult, not a troll at all. The media doesn't know what a "troll" is. They label people who bombard people with insults as trolls. The people who do that are not trolls. Trolls are much more subtle and often *funny*. Maybe it's going to end up like the hacker vs. cracker shit. It seems like the more mainstream things become the more our past is lost.

    8. Re:Trolling? by Psychotria · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd like to add that possibly satire is more align with trolling. A lot of The Onion articles are "trolls". To the initiated they illicit a response based on a falsehood. That's a troll.

    9. Re:Trolling? by Psychotria · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is a real troll. And a good one (even if it's not true):

      http://www.bash.org/?244321

    10. Re:Trolling? by unkiereamus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This kid is probably a sociopath....Sociopaths don't learn how to stop hurting people, they just learn not to get caught the next time.

      Fun fact, per the DSM-IV Sociopathy, or actually Antisocial Personality Disorder, as it's now known, can't be diagnosed before age 18.

      What that source material doesn't cite, and what 5 seconds of googlin failed to turn up, and thus would require too much effort for me to cite, is why.

      Put simply, almost all kids profile as sociopaths. Look at the diagnostic criteria, I'm sure you'll see why.

      Now, before anyone jumps up and says "But...but...he's 17, that's close enough to 18, right?", I'll point out that like any developmental milestone, that's just a guideline, there's always some play in development, plus or minus.

      Now, having said that, it's entirely possible that this kid actually is a sociopath, personally it doesn't read like that to me, but I'm willing to be wrong.

      --
      I needed a sig so people would know who I am, but I was too drunk to make something witty, so you get this instead.
    11. Re:Trolling? by houstonbofh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Internet is the main form of communication for kids today and depriving someone of internet access will isolate them socially completely.

      We used to call that "grounding" and somehow I survived it more than once. I know this may come as a shock, but punishment is supposed to be unpleasant.

  2. So, let the opining begin... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, do we actually believe that a college-age man is sufficiently motivated to troll the same person, including offline, for weeks on end; but so obtuse that he doesn't realize such trolling's effects, or did TFA's author just get played by a sociopathic little fucker's crocodile tears?

    I'm voting for #2, personally. Wholly anonymous mob pile-ons can easily enough sweep up ethically-unimpressive-but-basically-standard-issue people; and some damaged-but-mostly-harmless types actually seem willing to spend their time dumping copypasta on entire forums; but solitary, prolonged, systematic trolling of one target chosen for no reason? Kid is bad seed.

    1. Re:So, let the opining begin... by immaterial · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, we should lock this kid up with only criminals to socialize with, where he can (out of desire or necessity) join a neo-nazi prison gang who will reinforce all his fucked-up worldviews. And then a few years later we can throw him back into society and everything will be peachy-fucking-keen.

      Not only is the philosophy you're touting far more damaging to society as a whole, your RAWR PUNISHMENT attitude isn't even supported by the victim in this case. Who is being served by throwing the kid in prison?

    2. Re:So, let the opining begin... by Azghoul · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So you're in favor of either committing him to a mental ward against his will (read Thomas Szasz), killing a 17 y/o kid for being a dick, or having him suffer life-long physical and emotional injury due to prison rape. When the victim here says he wants to give the kid a chance.

      And you're the sane, socially acceptable guy here?

  3. Keywords by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Keywords in the original text:
    "basically an IT genius,"
    "hacked my facebook account"
    "trace the hackers and trolls for me using perfectly legal technology, which would lead to their IP addresses."
    "the abuse had emanated from three separate IP addresses in different corners of Ireland."
    "The third location was a friend's house."

    so, you can know the house location of each poster on twitter ? - troll-

    1. Re:Keywords by wordsnyc · · Score: 5, Informative

      There are a lot of people arguing that this whole story is a fable; the IT guy the author presents to defend his account is a feckless bullshitter. Basically it's a case of two guys who don't know that they don't know the technical difficulties in what they claim to have done. The whole thing is embarrassing and annoying.

      --
      Sent from the iPad I found in your car.
  4. Safety first by Kohath · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is why content delivery systems need to be licensed by governments. This wouldn't have happened if Twitter were prohibited because it's unlicensed.

    It's a safety issue. Just like the license you need before you can drive your own car. Just like the license you need to be a barber. Or the permit that those kids should have gotten before the cops shut down their lemonade stand. Or the license that that guy in North Carolina needs to publish dietary advice on his blog. Or the law license that Elizabeth Warren doesn't need because she's one of the special people.

    Leo Traynor should be ashamed for having an unlicensed conversation with his Troll. Is he a certified criminal counselor? He should have gotten the authorities involved, because they should always be involved. In everything.

    1. Re:Safety first by demonlapin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ergo, GP post is a good example of an actual troll.

  5. this is not trolling by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is stalking

    Its like calling arson vandalism

    Identify the nature of the transgression correctly

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  6. Re:At what point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    would of --> would have

    please

  7. Re:Traced his IP? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I bet they used a GUI interface using Visual Basic!

    No! Everyone knows when you trace an IP it does a 3D mapping google fly over with a little dot following a line from each location and then zooms in close to the final location showing a live video feed! I watch movies I know how computers work!

  8. How is it even difficult? by Kohath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Post a link for a guy to click on. He clicks on it. It goes to a page you publish on your server. You look in the server logs. You know his IP address. Then you can find his city and possibly his neighborhood from that. And you know his ISP.

    After that it can become more difficult. But it's hardly impossible. If a friend at the guy's ISP will do you a favor (the troll in the story is local), or if you can simply guess the right answer and check it, it's easy again. If you can read someone's cookies with a cross-site scripting vulnerability or trick them into installing malware, it's not going to be too hard to find them.

  9. Re:At what point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ... In the UK you're not allowed to protect yourself either -- it undermines government authority.

    While in essence what you say is true, in practice, you'll find that not all the police, judiciary and juries are 'on side' with that particular message.

    Another thing, whilst I'm at it, the UK has three separate legal systems, one covering England/Wales, one covering Scotland, and lastly Northern Ireland. There may be UK wide laws, which are usually 'rubber stamped' by the Scottish and NI legal systems, but the implementation and interpretation of said laws depends on which legal jurisdiction of the UK you're in.

    Having been told by a Chief Constable in Scotland that in the event of anyone breaking into my house, so long as it's within my property, I have the right to defend myself and my family, and if I fear for their or my life, then extreme actions are permissible, then I'd think it's safe to say that I do have a right to protect myself, the issue lies with how much force I use to do so and in what circumstances.

    I've no idea what the legal position is in England/Wales, but having lived there for 15 years and having on at least one occasion been caught on 'surveillance' cameras 'defending myself' against a couple of muggers (one ran, I left the other U/S on the ground) and despite the incident being on camera/tape, and despite my good self being a somewhat easy individual to spot in a crowd the police never did anything about it.

    So, yes, we have a bunch of control freaks in power who'd love to regiment every microsecond of our lives (irrespective of what political party they're pretending to be this month), yes, we're not allowed to own guns the same way you Americans are, yes, these restrictions haven't done a damn thing to stop the increase in 'gun crime' in the UK (Fact: gun crime is on the rise, and it is now easier to get large calibre handguns on the 'black market' since the UK government banned the ownership of the things), but, please, please don't get hung up on the fact that we do not own firearms somehow equates to we're without the means of defending ourselves, and, despite the best efforts of the State and despite the picture the media paints, we are allowed to do so.
    The laws are still policed and implemented by the more than occasional human being, a lot of incidents never get to the legal system in the first instance as the Police/CPS/Procurator Fiscals take one look at the evidence and won't present it, of those which do go, you only hear about the 'being prosecuted for self defence' cases that papers with a political agenda like the 'Daily Mail' want you to hear about, you'll never read about the people who are admonished/found 'not guilty' (unless it suits the paper 'politically').

  10. You have all been Trolled. by Tastecicles · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Leo Traynor is a fiction. Apparently he has lived in no less than seventeen countries over the past eight years, including some of the most politically unstable regions on the planet; more that he has managed to stay still long enough to gain a DPhil in international politics (no school anywhere has any record of him), that he has worked for all three main parties in the UK as a press liaison officer (yet no mention of him in the Press, ever). That he has worked for both parties in the US as a Press liaison officer (ditto). His story is so full of holes you could drain chips with it.

    Leo Traynor, you are a bullshitter.

    --
    Operation Guillotine is in effect.