Slashdot Mirror
Why Trolls Win With Toxic Comments
Hugh Pickens writes "The Web is a place for unlimited exchange of ideas. But according to an NPR report, researchers have found that rude comments on articles can change the way we interpret the news. 'It's a little bit like the Wild West. The trolls are winning,' says Dominique Brossard, co-author of the study on the so-called 'Nasty Effect.' Researchers worked with a science writer to construct a balanced news story on the pros and cons of nanotechnology, a topic chosen so that readers would have to make sense of a complicated issue with low familiarity. They then asked 1,183 subjects to review the blog post from a Canadian newspaper that discussed the water contamination risks of nanosilver particles and the antibacterial benefits. Half saw the story with polite comments, and the other half saw rude comments, like: 'If you don't see the benefits of using nanotechnology in these products, you're an idiot.' People that were exposed to the polite comments didn't change their views really about the issue covering the story, while the people that did see the rude comments became polarized — they became more against the technology that was covered in the story. Brossard says we need to have an anchor to make sense of complicated issues. 'And it seems that rudeness and incivility is used as a mental shortcut to make sense of those complicated issues.' Brossard says there's no quick fix for this issue (PDF), and while she thinks it's important to foster conversation through comments sections, every media organization has to figure out where to draw the line when comments get out of control. 'It's possible that the social norms in this brave new domain will change once more — with users shunning meanspirited attacks from posters hiding behind pseudonyms and cultivating civil debate instead,' writes Brossard. 'Until then, beware the nasty effect.'"
That's Why.
So.. you can't gain anything, but you CAN lose the idiots even more? Sounds like there's nothing you can do, then. The idiots will always be idiots and look for whatever excuse they can find to polarize themselves against things they don't understand.
Not sure what kinds of forums they're talking about, but I'm pretty sure there isn't any trolling on any of the forums I post on.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
The polarization is because of the left wing agenda pushed by Obama. You see it when the poor rise up and congratulate the new pope while simultaneously agreeing to farm subsidies for Monsanto
We have a winner!
Karma: Excellent. 15 moderator points expire sometime.
I don't know if anyone felt like this, but I remember in middle school being with a group of kids and as soon as someone said something nasty/ negative about an individual, everyone felt they had to agree and chime in. Whenever it was something positive, the responses were mostly neutral.
Now as a 30-something, I sense this "negative groupthink" with the younger coworkers, but with my peers we have disagreeing opinions. I know at least when I debate I try to see it from all angles, whereas people younger (and much older) than me seem to only have one point of view, and only theirs is the correct one. Or, it's easier to follow than to create your own set of opinions and facts to support it.
Does it begin with polarized news or comments that may correct/nullify the polarization of the news?
Certainly more and more people are realizing the News is polarized already.
There is only one way to deal with a troll, freeze them out. No access, no comments, and edited from the conversation. Think of it as cleaning graffiti.
TV ads have used anchoring for decades - "You won't pay $300, or $200, or $150 for this product, but it's yours today for 3 low payments of $29.99".
The first prices anchor your expectation, and $29 sounds like a great deal. Even those smart enough to mentally say "you mean $90" still come up with a 2-digit number instead of 3 digits, and it seems like a good deal.
Stores do this too. A slow-selling model will suddenly jump up in price when placed next to the product's big brother, at a higher price. The goal isn't to sell the more expensive product, it is to anchor your price to the smaller version seems like a deal.
When people have no idea what is going on, they need an anchor. This seems to be true of anything.
Automatic Master's thesis in any subject in advertising - take something advertisers have known for decades, make your thesis about how that applies to your field, and then do a study.
Advertisers have the financial incentive to know how people think, and the only problem is they stopped before generalizing into behavior patterns, and just made it about purchasing.
Strange how I still don't know the actual definition of 'troll' despite being on here for ages. It seems to have multiple definitions to suit whoever throws the comment out.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
I've never come across a news site that allowed "open" comments not become dominated by their inaneness.
Why do news sites allow them? I suppose there may be a connection between allowing them and traffic (I really don't know) - but I see highly serious, respectable local news outlets that already have a strong base suddenly decide "Hey, everyone's doing it, why not us?"
In ye old days we had "Letters to the Editor". Open comments are not a viable replacement. The former were heavily moderated.
Beetle B.
The study had the subjects read an article and the comments. I'm curious what effect rude comments have when noone reads the article, so we can better understand Slashdot.
Thank you very much for your time spent reading this, ladies and gentlemen.
It's cool. She's a pilot now.
The polarizing effect can even be a good one. When I see someone make a stupid attach I have a tendency to research the subject and become more informed. That is a good thing. Perhaps attacks make people learn more to defend their positions.
The changing of attitudes is more complex. Here are some possible reasons;
If people who can not carry on a polite debate in support or opposition of a technology perhaps their position is weak and they are trying to bully their way through. I would hesitate to support the same position as a troll.
Perhaps when people see negative speech they begin to think negatively bout everything and that manifests at negativity about the subject.
This too may be a research issue as more information may change the position.
It's called "bully."
Don't get what you want? Throw a tantrum or take by force.
Few people agree with what you say? Be mean to them, belittle them, In public if possible. Bully them until a) they kick your ass or kill you, b) you *do* win them over, or 3) they stop listening to you.
This particular phenomenon isn't quite new. TV and Religion work much the same way. One blogger or poster or anchor or pastor or priest will say one thing, then an avalanche of people incapable of original, independent thought nod in assent. In order to rile the crowd, they will attack the person and ideas of those who "oppose" them. "Gee, if senator Juan Pingalarga is here in church agreeing with the pastor's bashing of gays, it must be ok! I'll bash gays too!" Tell me this isn't how it works. Tell me this isn't how we get these sickening political comments threads on CNN, etc. Tell me that's not how we get these fantastically bellicose flame wars here about win vs. unix, apple vs. android / samsung etc.
Tell me this isn't why America's rapidly slipping into irrelevance -- the smart and quiet ones constantly out-mouthed by the dumb and loud.
This starts at home and school, and the only way to buck it is to teach the little ones right, not trusting their education largely to TV or the Internet.
The "Civilized World" jumped the shark ca. 1973.
Clearly the submitter and editor had Slashdot uneasily perched in the backs of their minds as they put this one up.
Slashdot has moderators, which raises it above some over sites. However, the moderators are volunteers and tend to be young (most of them are under 30 is my guess). My experience is that with stories like nanotech where there is not widespread prior familiarity or strong opinions, the mods do a good job in trying to be evenhanded and modding up comments that raise an insightful or informative point, regardless of which side they are on. But in stories where the mods have a strong personal bias, that bias will be reflected in their evaluations, so we often see the following:
+5, Informative:
Die RIAA/MPAA! You slimy fuckers need to crawl back under a big rock and stay there!!!
while point by point rebuttals taking the anti-piracy side that clearly took several minutes to compose might be modded as "troll". It could be that the moderation itself on those types of posts is intended to be funny or ironic, but somehow that gets lost when every non-collapsed post takes the same side of the issue.
Slashdot would benefit if its moderators learned to be more evenhanded, even on stories where they have strong personal opinions.
Why do you think politicians use nasty vile language to trash their opponents? It delivers both (a) the message that they are better, and (b) reinforces that with a visceral reaction from their audience. The problem become when they then have to sit down and work out a solution to a problem - the previous reaction of the audience makes their compromise seem unacceptable. So what we have in a two-party system is a race to abandon the middle. Anyone trying to reduce the level of nastiness is attacked by their opponent as weak and unprincipled, and therefore is voted out of office, leading to a more and more splintered society.
The overall point is to stay away from comments since, at best, they change nothing?
In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
Traditionally powerful people have been pissed lately they can't easily program the masses for the wars and other scams they have decided for in the Bilderberg group or wherever the real decisions are made.
Let's smear Free Speech and call it "Trolling". We really, really need to "license" speech to ensure the current class will control all us dumb fucks. After all, in their infinite wisdom they are improving the system every day. Finance is more stable than ever, industry is prospering, public health is improving. Obesity is non-existent, due to the good works of the corporations and bankers. Nobody abuses drugs, our families are 100% in good shape.
Only these trolls, they threaten this marvellous system, as they ask unlicensed questions whenever the weapons peddlers and near-east religionists want to increase their revenue and power. I say, control those nasty trolls !!!
That's the real story, here boys. The corrupt politicos and the journalist whores are pissed.
Captcha:Lawsuit
Like the story out of the Copyright Office, how they are going to "reform copyright" by changing the length from "Life + 70" to "Life + 50 + 20-if-someone-renews-it" plus some minor details with the safe harbor rules and increased enforcement which is of course always good...
WAS TROLLED TO DEATH!!!!!
Instead of happy, positive comments, threads were hijacked by trolls all over the place! I'm glad Slashdot is finally doing something about the trolling!
Big mistake. The idea that any rude comment or any comment that you disagree with is a troll. Any clear view on a subject, any unpopular opinion is a troll.
I've been marked as a troll, for example, for my ideas regarding religion (I understand that religion is detrimental for modern humans, that teaching religion to children is a form of abuse, and therefore indoctrinating anyone under 18 should be illegal).
Truth is, regardless of what you think about my idea (please don't turn this into a religious discussion, I only used it as an example), that doesn't mean I'm trolling, it only means I have a radically different idea, and that yours and mine are incompatible, it doesn't mean I'm intentionally trying to upset you. If you are so sensitive, the problem lies with you, not with my comment.
Also, the idea that anything rude must be a troll. Rude comments win (if the underlying idea has any basis) because rude shows conviction, certainty. If I say "nanotechnology is a good idea, you should be more open-minded", I sound weak. If I say "Fuck this anti-science bullshit. We need to get rid of fear of technology, anyone that doesn't understand the benefits of nanotechnology after reading this article is a backwards idiot that has no place in modern society", I'm essentially saying the same fucking thing, but with different wording. This PC society we live in tells us we need to be nice to everybody. That is simply not truth, if you understand that something is simply wrong, and you are certain of your ideas, grow some fucking balls and express them in a way that is actually effective.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
... Which leads to topics like this where so many people post lulz-troll comments that you can't tell the difference between actual trolls and people just trying to be funny.
Aw, screw you guys!
It's this 'if I don't understand the argument, shout it down" sort of mentality that allows ideas like the Tea Party, Holocaust deniers (sp?), and all sorts of other whack job ideologies to take such root in the US and among other wealthier nations, where we have access to all kinds of technology, and yet the average person is slowly becoming dumber.
Being able to use 'technology' like ipads fools our less educated citizens into believing their are actually quite bright, and in no further need of education or self reflection.
I can set up my own home router - therefore when I believe Obama is the root cause of all of our issues (thanks fox news) I MUST be right.
And thanks for sharing your articulate, polite comments with the rest of us. If only you would post your home address so that I might send you an appropriate thank you card for your insight.
Who project their issues onto others in name tossing. If you *think* that's "winning", then I suggest you review formal logic and see that ad hominem attacks are illogical and invalid in debate. Calling others names is the surest sign of defeat in a real debate. You're speaking of mere pissing contests if you consider name tossing valid.
THis is a stupid article, by a stupid author on a stupid site and linux and FOSS sucks.
If fair and logical debate were enforced on websites, no deomcrat could prevail.
Their ideas are toxic and must be legislated at gunpoint.
Same with Liberals. Also Atheists and Global-Warming Believers
would have no way to cope if presented with logic and fairplay.
The marketplace of ideas is highly competitive, and their lame theories do not sell without government subsidy.
And the WELL stinks.
Circular fantasies about post-economic info-tech utopia.
You people were the usefull idiots who forged the tools for perpetual, universal surveillance and drone warfare.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
...always crap anyway, so why read them at all?
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Being able to use 'technology' like ipads fools our less educated citizens into believing their are actually quite bright, and in no further need of education or self reflection.
Haven't you looked at the stats on an ipad? +20 int, +20 status, last I checked.
STFU N00B!
Everyone post "nasty" comments - rude and abrupt, whether you're arguing for or against the premise of the article.
Then tomorrow when it gets posted as a dupe, everyone post constructive comments, and we'll see what happens.
Not that slashdot is an island of perfection it has a pretty good BS filter, one of the best troll filters, and potentially one of the best off-topic filters. So if there is an article on black holes and someone starts ranting about 911 conspiracies they end up with a -1 pretty damn quick. If someone posts their slightly strange theory on black holes they may or may not survive but probably won't get a 5 and if someone goes half off-topic but against the grain of slashdotters and says blackholes are just a theory and the bible has a better answer they too will get badly spanked.
Where self moderating groups like slashdot and reddit can go wrong is when you violate a cultural taboo. Saying valid good things about Microsoft or valid bad things about Linux will get you a karmic black eye and on reddit not being racist will get you in trouble in many sub sections. Yet reddit is pretty good at sorting out fact from fiction (compared to many news organizations' comments sections).
The quality of many news organizations' comments moderation is best shown by the number of spam/completely bonkers comments that they let survive.
On a side note I am not happy with the number of organizations using Discus (I have hosts blocked them). I had an experience with one of their people and man o man do they seem to gather data.
Let me educate you about the roots of Nazism and Fascism: In the 1920s finance basically did the same thing they recently attempted. Namely, robbing their own banks for the gain of the banker. Real economy was destroyed, because finance is the backbone of the capitalist system. Break the backbone, break the organism.
Ordinary people were told that "no job means you are useless, means you don't get food". Now, can you understand it was entirely rational for them to vote for people like Hitler and similar politicians ? The financial Darwinism forced the common people to vote for parties which brought a different flavour of Darwinism. Hitler was the only politician who assured people they would eat and he actually kept his promise.
I can also tell you we can get (broadly speaking) the same nasty shit again, if the current elite don't wake up to their insanity.
The tea party probably is a helpless and ineffective attempt to fix the issues we have. But if you think that ridiculing them is the right way to go, I say, enjoy the pill they give you when/if the current system has self-destructed.
Rudeness or politeness are essentially orthogonal to addressing the topic under discussion, as the topic can be addressed using either form. However, rudeness can mask lack of substance in a comment, because the crude words act as a magnet or decoy to divert attention away from poor logic. While it may not be totally accurate to call this use of rudeness "trolling" because its purpose is not to bait, nevertheless it constitutes logical entrapment or derailing, which is similar.
This is why rudeness should be shunned (or moderated away) in forums that intend to provide effective logical discourse.
If you join a discussion, never ever use arguments! It suggests that your position is not as clear and widely accepted as you think it is and provides your opponent with something to attack! Its far more efficient to dismiss his claim with a witty one-liner and a derogatory "bah" *thumb down*.
Why assume that polarization is bad? Merely because the underlying story is complex (far moreso than ever presented in any media) does not mean it deserves attention. Sure, the original authors might think so, many people do not care.
Worse (from the zealots PoV), people have an absolute right to choose not to care. For these people, perhaps polarization is an acceptable shortcut. The do seem to choose it.
FUCK YOU! Your stupid fucking theories are fucking STUPID! Anybody who lets god damned TROLLS direct the traffic in their little fucking teeny-tiny brains is a fucking MORON. And YOU'RE a moron for writing this stupid, fucking, DRIVEL. ... There!
Now, the effects described in the article will be effectively canceled out by the direction of my negative comments against the theory. People will no longer be swayed by trolls. Talk about short-cuts! You fucking idiot!
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
I suppose it's apt in a discussion like this that the actual point becomes lost, but it's pretty sad that both the Slashdot article and NPR summary seem to completely misrepresent the conclusion of the paper.
One of their original hypotheses of the paper was that people would agree with trolls, but it clearly states that this hypothesis was not supported by their data.
What was supported was that people became more polar about the beliefs they already held. The relevant line from the paper:
"When exposed to uncivil comments, those who have higher levels of support for nanotechnology were more likely to report lower levels of risk perception and those with low levels of support were more likely to report higher levels of risk perception".
So it's not about trolls "winning" in terms of successfully persuading people, but only in terms of successfully destroying any chance of a reasonable debate.
My suspicion is that NPR probably present the quote about "they became more against the technology that was covered in the story" without context, creating the impression that people were blindly agree with trolls.
It's a favorite ploy of fanbois to claim that entirely correct but negative comments about their precious are "toxic" and therefore are trolling a forum, and that is then used as a basis for eliminating the adverse comments entirely.
Beware that word, "toxic". It almost always means nothing more than "critical", and is used in a "Think of the children!" kind of way to prevent logical discussion.
You think that could happen? Is there a site like that?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
You, kind sir, have far too much time on your hands!
10% of people have an opinion, and the rest are lazy and just pick one of those rather then think about there own stance....sounds about right.
In some certain circumstances enemies don't cost you anything and friends get you some small benefit
One example would be a deep Red (or Blue) district politician who acts like trolls and makes as many enemies as friends. But his friends are in his/her district enemies are outside, so he does not care.
Or even an obnoxious car salesman advertising in radio "Costoria Buick! Owner Ed has gone mad! He is stackin' 'em deep, selling 'em cheap"!. Yeah, that guy is irritating, but you might still remember the name of the dealership, and the irritated millions do not bother him. The few sales leads that he does get is enough for Ed Costoria.
So I don't see the internet trolls as winners, but the sites hosting them as losers.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Pseudonyms and rude behavior are separable issues, and should be treated as such. Rude behavior can be addressed with moderation (and should be.)
Pseudonyms are important for a number of reasons, including protection from stalkers, rouge governments (but I repeat myself), troll shadowing, bullying, ex-(wives|husbands|jackbooted thugs|etc), revolutionary ideas that step on other people's turf, or could, critical political commentary, and, oh yes, privacy, should one desire that.
The fact that pseudonyms are the first layer for many trolls is irrelevant if moderation is adequate. And that, in turn, can be addressed in many ways. Slashdot, for instance, reduces visibility of trolls by rare (unfortunately) moderation. Other sites let the users detect and suppress the trolls; that kills trolls faster, but it also kills contrary ideas and that's not good.
So it seems to me that the most important thing here is to get moderation up to the highest possible standard. When you run a site, after all, it's your barbecue... you should get right in there and see that the level of discourse you want is maintained. If you don't, it's your fault. Don't blame the pseudonymous folks for your failings.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
There's nothing that makes me think about the plight of the LGBT community more than seeing the loonies from the Westboro Baptist Church screeching about them. Same with neo-Nazi groups, anti-immigrant activists and others.
Have gnu, will travel.
*Ahem* Posting what you did and then saying "please don't turn this into a $thing discussion, I only used it as an example" is trolling, and it's one of the most effective trolls because it attempts to pre-discredit anyone who calls out or opposes the opinion espoused by the troll.
It's a bit like when people preface insults with "no offense" to pretend they're not insults. The "no offense" part indicates that the person saying it acutely aware that what he's about to say is an insult, but he doesn't want the victim to have a chance at a rebuttal.
If you ever catch yourself saying or writing a disclaimer like "please don't interpret $x as $y", it means you shouldn't say $x in the first place, and then you won't need to say the disclaimer.
Made an actual effort to let us report troll comments and fucking remove them.
... a pathetic attempt at 'poisoning the well', and making the public think that anybody who tells the TRUTH about 'the eternal Jew' is being 'rude' and should therefore be ignored.
Oh look!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/eurozone-finance-ministers-seek-to-complete-much-delayed-deal-on-rescue-package-for-cyprus/2013/03/15/b2b30392-8ddd-11e2-adca-74ab31da3399_story.html
The filthy Jews' banking system has bankrupted Cyprus, and now the shabbas goy 'government' of Cyprus (who are clearly frontmen for the Jewish bankers) have 'accepted' a 'loan' of $13 BILLION from the IMF.
But hang on a minute. Where exactly do the IMF get this 'money' from? Why, they create it out of THIN AIR, and then 'lend' it to 'bankrupt' governments, who then make the PUBLIC pay all this counterfeit money back - to the filthy Jews.
I wonder how bad you idiots' lives will have to become before you'll even become slightly open to listening to a point of view that is something other than the Jew bullshit you hear from the JEW media. Idiots.
Moral of the story = Verifiable fact gets the best of trolls every time.
exposure to incivility and risk perceptions. Thus, our rst hypothesis was not supported
It's not about troll winning. It's about trolls causing people to become more polarized and entrenched in their positions, without any overall change in average position.
Hi Bill,
you still destroying America?
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Thomas' Corallary to Godwin's Law.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
It's well known that morons and lefties think good manners is always right/good, and bad manners is always wrong/bad. Hey, they'll vote the absolute evil as long as they talk politely and calmly and call the others a fascist (regardless of what fascism truly means). All you have to do to make them move like the sheep they are is to tell them to go in the opposite direction you want them to move. It's first course in politics. They'll also give far, far more importance to single emotive stories (even if you don't hide the fact that you made up the story) than factual and global data that contradicts it. They'll also follow groupthink and attack in packs, so if you have one puppet account is pretty easy to derail a discussion. The only thing they really hate, is being told they're being manipulated and showing them the strings. However, because they worship the leader, they will attack the messenger that reveals that the King is naked.
The polarization is because of the left wing agenda pushed by Obama. You see it when the poor rise up and congratulate the new pope while simultaneously agreeing to farm subsidies for Monsanto
We have a winner!
Yeah, this stuff sounds like it was generated by a "troll" generator, similar to the old buzzword generators.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
netcraft confirms it, Slashdot is dying.
The trolls already realize this and left, have you?
"Where self moderating groups like slashdot and reddit can go wrong is when you violate a cultural taboo. Saying valid good things about Microsoft or valid bad things about Linux will get you a karmic black eye and on reddit not being racist will get you in trouble in many sub sections" - by EmperorOfCanada (1332175) on Saturday March 16, @02:17PM (#43191883) Homepage
Specifically the BOLDED part of what I quoted from you above: VALID FACTS, are valid facts - & should NEVER be downmoderated for telling the truth with verifiable, concrete, & undeniable evidences.
Oh, you mean putting the "Pro-*NIX" bullshitters in their places after YEARS of hearing "Linux = Secure, Windows != Secure"?
Then they find out the truth, & then only to have their b.s. blow up in their FACES once a Linux started getting used (most used = most attacked, period) - & nothing shows THAT, better than ANDROID on smartphones (where Linux FINALLY has top most used spot, & is being attacked rampantly for YEARS now, showing the PURE FUD that was spread around on /. for years is just that, utter bullshit!).
* Heck - For years here, I've gone thru exactly what you stated & on exactly the notes you posted above!
(I.E.-> In getting unjustifiable downmods on MS vs. Linux posts where I do EXACTLY what you stated above.... however, never validly disproving facts I posted with backing sources as citations from reputable sources!)
That's not valid, & certainly NOT in logical rational debate &/or discussions.
I mean, seriously: What KIND OF "RATIONALE" IS THAT? WTF is "cultural taboos" on a forums??
After all - Who gives a FLYING "F" about "cultural taboos" when they are NOT truth, & PURE FUD?
That's intentionally MISLEADING OTHERS, & I certainly don't care for it, & actually DETEST that (lies & non-truth is pure bullshit is why, used to further some fool's plans only).
QUESTION: Do you actually LIKE reading utter bullshit? Do you even KNOW what that is in EVERY tech topic here??
See - Sometimes, folks don't (myself included in the Science areas specifically on this forums, rather than computer tech ones (which I consider myself QUITE master in on most levels possible after nearly 30++ yrs. in this art & science total time, most of it professionally)!
Folks CAN & WILL take what they read on forums like this as "gospel", & even when it's mere "FUD", it's ANYTHING but truth, & only 'zealotry'... 1/2 truths @ best, & marketers use that type of bullshit, all the time.
(Especially in the case noted above which you yourself brought up, rightfully so, because it DOES illustrate a good point about THIS site's forums!)
APK
P.S.=> It's even worse when I do a post on hosts files' value to end users of them in added speed, security, reliability & even anonymity (to an extent):
In fact, in those posts, I specifically CHALLENGE any "naysayers/trolls" to disprove points I put up in my posts - they never have, or do... they only apply bogus downmods to *try* to "hide" those posts in some sort of "effete retaliation"!
Proof?
Ok - See here as a RECENT (only 6 days ago) single "example thereof", of MANY like it -> http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3532567&cid=43130167
(NOW - IF they could do actually disprove my points validly on computing tech grounds? Hey - Then, yes, I'd HAVE to "eat" the downmod... however - only thing is? They never do, & won't even *try* anymore since they've failed so many times in that capacity & pull the bogus downmods instead shown above...).
... apk
As bad as I've always found the internet to be, as a whole, I never realized how tame and timid it truly was until the idea of attaching shitty third-party discussion thread services all over the place started catching on. You know what I'm talking about -- Facebook comment widgets (where people actually attach their real name to some of the most vile idiocy I've ever read) and inline Disqus forums. You find these instances every time you read the comments under an article on a CBS affiliate station's website or -- predictably -- to any page on the internet that has a comment section and has been linked to by DrudgeReport. This is where you find people who have 50,000 posts to their name, commenting on every single article or thread ever found. Spewing the same moronic drivel with references to "Obozo" and "Oh, notice the libtards that have corrupted the media wont' publish the race of the criminal in this news story, because it's probably a [insert non-white skin color, here]".
Fortunately, these little honey-pots keep these idiots occupied and way from the rest of us. All you have to do is set your browser to block all facebook, disqus and other widgets and your life is much better. Let the pigs fester in their own shit.
Given the communications delay, might yet prove to provide a new safe haven for human beings?
Running out of frontier is not a situation unique to today, and neither is the proposed solution. Rolling Stones. Onward and outward because progress is the only place fit for human habitation.
What a dumb article how exactly are they winning? Oh by making you write this dumb article about them. What next? An article by you talking about how the "welfare queens" are winning by taking government handouts. Sorry but much like the trolls, if your a black welfare queen you ain't winning.
Better than being Sardaukar86 the troll eatin his words http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3417867&cid=42756893 wearing egg on his face, considering he put his foot in his mouth and spiced it with the bitter taste of SELF-defeat eating his words due to facts in his slashdot peers showing quite the opposite of what he stated quoted there. Of course, you're probably just Sardaukar86 posting as ac now, using a boring stale worn out 'canned reply' line of b.s., after you yourself applied a downmod to the link above you replied to. That's a very typical troll trick, and one that is easily seen through/transparent.
To the villifier go the spoils. The first to call the opposition Nazis or some equally inflammatory term captures the hearts and minds of the readers. Only an idiot would think otherwise.
mob-ocratic
Stop fucking saying that you uneducated idiot. The word is `` ochlocracy''. Stop using stupid neologism and pick up a god damn book.
In ye old days there was a specific amount of space available for letters to the editor; usually about half a page.
There is still a limit even today: the patience of the reader. Just because you can publish every comment on an article does not mean that you should. I rarely do more than glance at the comments on news sites because they are full of drivel. They could at least select the one or two sensible comments and have the rest accessible by a link if anyone wants to bother reading them.
Spend time at Alternet or Huffington Post or DKos and they're hypermoderating like none other while shouting about how they love free speech. Free speech as long as it agrees lockstep with them that is.
They confuse the two. If you dare question the doctrine of the 98% majority of any website you are immediately censored for 'trolling'
You know, nostalgia is not the same nowadays as it was back then.
I also remember when the troll was conceived as a person who plays a game of intellectual manipulation to triumph in argument; usually, the troll's does not adhere to the views he expresses. But the features of trolling were often sophistry (for the serious troll), fallacies (for the trolls who don't know better), but most impotantly, the necessary feature is a polemic (i.e. argumet). These weren't flame wars and did not appear as such, and between usenet and oldschool web forum communities a good troll could keep it up for days, weeks, even months. Most often the troll is outed after someone discovers the user in concurrent or prior participation in other troll-like threads there and elsewhere (trolls often used the same handles and accounts across sites and services). These people I am now forced to call Original Trolls, or OT, to distinguish from what people call trolls now. Sure, some nominal trolls pulled off similar pranks, like the markov text people, always good for a chuckle.
But then came the forum ninjas, those guys who start off as OT's might - with sincere comments - and quickly abandon the discussions they've started. But then someone started calling these people trolls, and then it was open season: You were a troll if you caused any kind of dischord, intended or not. How many times have we seen a thread start out innocent enough, only to go up in flames, and people almost always accuse the OP instead of the person in the thread who lit the matches? Yea, people really don't care to be discerning about who is a troll these days.
The worst kind of troll, if you ask me, is the troll crier. This is the user who casually labels other users as a troll, without justification. And once the name sticks, it is hard to shake, as there is no recourse for the accused to defend himself as not a troll. Meanwhile the troll crier, like one who cries witch, can point to anything as evidence for his claim. Bad crops means a witch, right? So what makes a troll? Anything, the troll crier doesn't even care, not that he needs to prove his point. And that's just the kind of thing a troll might do. Hmm. Something to think about the next time you find yourself dismissing users because of your local troll crier.
How hilarious. A mass media outlet like Slashdot complaining about 'trolling'. Barely a day goes by here without the owners of Slashdot ensuring some pro-war, anti-Iran/NK trolling article gets one of the slots.
Better, this article is from a Canadian newspaper- a nation where criticism of Israel in print is actually a crime.
And why was I so NOT surprised that the 'troll' comments were not designed to bash the use of 'nano-silver' in water. Given Blair's recent confiscation of 10% of everyone's bank-account in Cyprus, I'm surprised the newspaper didn't make the story about gold ownership, with the so-called 'troll' comments attacking anyone who didn't agree with owning gold. You see, the REAL point of this article in an extreme zionist newspaper was to attack those political groups frequently described as 'anti-zionist'.
For some reason, 'libertarian' anti-zionist groups seem to attract advertising from people pushing 'nano-silver' solutions (whatever they may be- pseudo medicine is so boring), so a zionist newspaper wanted to CLEVERLY (snigger) label the other side as 'trolls'.
This is what passes as a 'clever' psy-op by the zionists like Brossard. A REAL study would have 3 groups- no 'trolling', pro-silver 'trolling' and anti-silver trolling. Even the average Slashdot beta should be bright enough to work this out.
Game theory tells us that if an opponent makes a 'strong' move, they have to inform us about their strategy by doing so. In other words, to play well, you must reveal something about your hand. On the other hand, given the absolute support the Canadian government gives Israel and all zionist causes, and given the depraved pro-Israel racists that own and edit Canadian newspapers, it comes as no surprise that daily, Canadians are exposed to such propaganda.
In 'The Newstatesman' (a 'Fabian' magazine from the UK that you can think of as "Tony Blair in print form") the same article was given THIS conclusion...
QUOTE: "Conclusion: don't comment, don't read the comments, don't allow comments. Save the science!"
In other words, only your MASTERS have a voice. Ordinary people should keep their mouths shut, and their ears closed to the opinions of other ordinary people. So, Slashdot betas, when the owners of Slashdot push an article whose conclusion is that YOUR opinions don't matter, and should be censored out of existence, how do you feel? Let me guess- you all feel inclined to agree- that is why you are betas after all.
How are news sites paid? Advertising. How much you get paid for a specific ad depends upon how many people click on it. If you want to sell lots of advertising it helps to have lots of page views. Think about this, a troll posts an idiotic comment, say 90 percent of the comments made about President Obama over the last five years or 99 percent of anything coming out of the mouths of Republicans or their buttboys, the Libertarians. Other readers jump on the troll and tell him what a fucking idiot he is, and every time they do so it counts as a page view. Sure, it's sleazy and contemptible, but it brings in the bucks the way that the old "letters to the editor" section of your local newspaper ever did, and if there's anything that the advent of the internet has done it's completely kick the shit out of the advertising supported content model used by newspapers, radio and television.
cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
NEEDZ MOAR HITLER!
cheap labor conservatives - they want to keep you hungry enough to be thankful for minimum wage.
I'll probably get hate for saying it but fuck it, its the truth, Slashdot has REALLY gone downhill since they sold it. We used to have epic threads about subjects like file systems and dark matter and you would often get experts in the field to debate with. Hell I've have argued about different OS designs with some of the guys that were building the bloody things and even when you got schooled you frankly learned something.
It's obviously a sign that 2013 is the year of Linux on the desktop.
"Slashdot has REALLY gone downhill since they sold it .. if I find me another site that actually talks geek tech and has a decent community I'll be happy to join them"
I totally agree, I also find the choice of submissions, and what they don't choose, most curious and baffling. I too weary of finding a decent geek tech site.
AccountKiller
"Then they find out the truth, & then only to have their b.s. blow up in their FACES once a Linux started getting used (most used = most attacked, period) - & nothing shows THAT, better than ANDROID on smartphones"
Do you mean malware targeted to Android, which does not impact the technical aspects of the linux platform.
AccountKiller
With backing links & pertinent quotes/excerpts from them:
SAME GOES FOR WINDOWS (it's apps on it that represent the MAJORITY of what gets exploited):
"Nearly nine out of ten security vulnerabilities in Windows computers last year were the fault of popular third-party applications, as opposed to Microsoft's own software." FROM -> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/03/15/secunia_vulnerability_research/
(And, that's "hot off the presses"/current...)
+
Linux STILL needs patches @ the core - all the way from kernel build 2.6 thru current ones (been there for ages on this one):
---
Linux STILL needs patching @ kernel level in 2013, thru ALL distros 2.6-3.8 current:
http://www.zdnet.com/linux-kernel-exploit-gets-patched-7000011844/
(Face facts, that THAT line of "b.s." of "Linux = Secure & Windows != Secure" just DOESN'T HOLD ANY WATER - the core of Linux STILL gets patched vs. vulnerabilities, just like Windows NT-based OS, & they ARE RELATIVELY THE SAME AGE too! Thus, proving (especially via ANDROID) that "the most used = most attacked"...)
---
Apparently, I need to put out more on that note, so here goes (as to Linux's "fine security showing" over the past couple years now/current history):
---
2012:
New Linux Rootkit Emerges:
https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/new-linux-rootkit-emerges-112012
"A new Linux rootkit has emerged and researchers who have analyzed its code and operation say that the malware appears to be a custom-written tool designed to inject iframes into Web sites and drive traffic to malicious sites for drive-by download attacks. The rootkit is designed specifically for 64-bit Linux systems."
---
'FIRST ever' Linux, Mac OS X-only password sniffing virus spotted:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/08/29/linux_mac_trojan/
---
Medicaid hack update: 500,000 records and 280,000 SSNs stolen:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/medicaid-hack-update-500000-records-and-280000-ssns-stolen/11444
So, what's dts.utah.gov running everyone?
LINUX (and yes, it got HACKED) -> http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=dts.utah.gov
What's health.utah.gov running too??
YOU GUESSED IT: LINUX AGAIN -> http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=health.utah.gov
* Ah, yes - see the YEARS OF /. "BS" FUD is CRUMBLING AROUND THE PENGUINS EARS HERE & 2012's starting out just like 2011 did below!
===
2011:
KERNEL.ORG COMPROMISED - The Cracking of Kernel.org: (that's VERY bad - do you trust it now?)
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/11/08/31/2321232/Kernelorg-Compromised
---
Linux.com pwned in fresh round of cyber break-ins:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/12/more_linux_sites_down/
---
Mysql.com Hacked, Made To Serve Malware:
http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/09/26/2218238/mysqlcom-hacked-made-to-serve-malware
What's that site running? You guessed it - Linux -> http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=mysql.com
Goodie two shoes wins no debate, what a surprising result to no god damn one ever.
So if someone is modded troll, it's a positive thing? It indicates the person is influencing society? Cool.
Feminish boo-boo kissing is destroying our rights and freedoms. Hidden between the lines in this kind of piece is the implied idea that we have to modify a first amendment right because it hurts someone or something. This is how the argument to destroy a right starts, whether it is the second amendment to keep and bear arms, or the first amendment to guarantee free speech - even free speech we don't agree with. No right is supposed to have a cost appended to it today.
The nineteenth amendment gave women the equal right to vote and instantly caused a massive pandering to female sensibilities. Gynocentrism in the USA was delayed by the economic depression and various wars, but it was inevitable once the country stabilized. Slow to start due to historical inertia, it is now in full flower and massively destructive to the main thing that has created and supported our rights and the advance and power of our country: male sensibilities, viewpoints and attitudes. Our political forefathers were male. They created the most successful form of government and body of rights ever created, but I fear neither of these things can stand before the feminish sensibilites that are more and more controlling of our society and government.
Oh, and by the way, watch for manditory driving helments and kevlar driving suits. The super feminish government we are developing is going to protect us from ourselves in all things wether we like it or not. Mommy knows best.
E Proelio Veritas.
completely explained.
Look, if you love something and want to rave about it online you just end up looking like a douche or even worse, a shill:
"Oh, I just bought this amazing cracker from Kraft and it tastes so awesome and buttery but OMFG I can't believe its only 20 calories for 20 of them!!!. 5 yummy stars but I really wish I could make it 10!!!!"
Instead, this gets far more traction and respect:
"Everyone at Kraft must die from a plague of putrid boils for creating a cracker that tastes like sawdust that was farted out of a Keebler elf's asshole after running a marathon."
The only exception of content that is annoyingly positive all the time is the iTunes music reviews because it is a community of douches trying to out douche each other raving about their favorite artists. First, you can't review something unless you buy it so its stupid to buy something to talk about how much it sucks. Second, if you buy music from an artist then you are already a fanboy so you are going to give it a glowing review in spite of it sounding like a bunch of cat's in heat being banged on drums covered in sandpaper. iTunes music reviews are completely irrelevant because by design it's a self perpetuating shower of douche wash.
It's Monday, I'm in a mood.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Years back... I mean decades ago (now I feel old), there was a text-only "game" for the Atari called Abuse. The computer would spout insults at you and you would type insults right back. There was no scoring or "winning", the game lasted until you shut off the program. I quickly found that I didn't have a big talent for tossing insults, but I did come upon a tactic that seemed to "infuriate" the computer. I'd type kind statements into it. The program would keep upping its game, becoming more and more "frustrated" that I wasn't responding in kind.
It almost makes me wonder if some trolls could be defeated in this manner. Trolls who come into a forum looking to generate waves of angry responses, but who are met with kind remarks instead might get frustrated and leave. NOTE: You don't need to agree with the troll's view. Just express your disagreement in a nice manner. Don't give them the reaction they are looking for.
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
On vBulletin forums (I used to administer a bunch) the option was called "Tachy goes to Coventry"
One of the things I actually liked about Facebook was the option to remove posts (from others' view). If you got some insulting retard, you could just extricate yourself from the conversation and there'd be a thread with him basically talking to himself.
I once commented on a female friend's post, and her overly-jealous (and not too bright) then-BF started flaming me. I removed my post and suddenly his flame is attached to her posts. Good times :-)