Defining trolling

Magical Realist

Magical Realist

Valued Senior Member
There seems to be alot of leeway on this site given to trolling. Many posters obviously trolling are permitted to do so, while others who aren't are regularly infracted for it. Can we come to some objective definition of what constitutes trolling? Is it an infraction-worthy offense or not? And is flaming an infraction-worthy offense?

Here's a good definition for trolling I found:

trolling
"Being a prick on the internet because you can. Typically unleashing one or more cynical or sarcastic remarks on an innocent by-stander, because it's the internet and, hey, you can."

Guy: "I just found the coolest ninja pencil in existence."
Other Guy: "I just found the most retarded thread in existence."

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=trolling&defid=895504

Here's a more thorough definition:

"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."===http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

troll-cartoon.jpg
 
Last edited:
I know. It's frustrating how tolerant the moderators are of anti-scientific rubbish on a science forum, of all things.
 
Daecon said:
I know. It's frustrating how tolerant the moderators are of anti-scientific rubbish on a science forum, of all things.
Click to expand...

Posting "anti-scientific rubbish on a science forum" is trolling? I've never heard that before..For example how many non-scientific subforums are there here?
 
It is when the anti-scientific people are adamant that they're right, all of science and the scientific method is wrong and do the equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears going "la-la-la I can't hear you".
 
Daecon said:
It is when the anti-scientific people are adamant that they're right, all of science and the scientific method is wrong and do the equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears going "la-la-la I can't hear you".
Click to expand...

So when posters argue a point of view that others perceive to be against the scientific method, and refuse to back down to these others, that's trolling? I don't think so...
 
Magical Realist said:
Posting "anti-scientific rubbish on a science forum" is trolling? I've never heard that before..For example how many non-scientific subforums are there here?
Click to expand...
Often, yes. It's akin to going to a religious site and posting "God is a scumbag!" or going to an abused-women support site and posting "I likes em when they yell." Those posts are, in general, troll posts - even if the poster really believes what they are posting.
 
Especially when their points have been emprically, definitively disproven beyond all doubt and they still ignore basic physics in order to push their own insane concept of things like gravity or light. Yeah, I call that trolling.

That's in addition to stuff that just can't be disproven because it deals with things outside of science. So it's not just about the religious or the paranormal.
 
Magical Realist said:
Posting "anti-scientific rubbish on a science forum" is trolling? I've never heard that before..For example how many non-scientific subforums are there here?
Click to expand...


On most science forums it is trolling, yes.
It is done to flame and promote discourse, frustration and anger among the more logical thinking people and any scientists, especially when it is done with no real evidence.
Yep, we have the fringe sections on this forum for all the nonsense, but even then, some of what is proposed deserves refutation.
Just because you post in the woo section, does not mean that your woo should go unchallenged and not be refuted and called for what it really is.
This is first and foremost a science forum, for the promotion of science, speculative ideas and hypothesis, and all should be governed by the scientific method.
Claiming ghosts exist because of an individual's say so, is not real evidence.
Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence.
 
billvon said:
Often, yes. It's akin to going to a religious site and posting "God is a scumbag!" or going to an abused-women support site and posting "I likes em when they yell." Those posts are, in general, troll posts - even if the poster really believes what they are posting.
Click to expand...

Disagreeing with someone about evidence for a phenomena or what even constitutes science or it's purview isn't equivalent to assaulting someone's personal belief. Unless you're saying like religion and women's causes science is a value system that people believe in for moral reasons? But even then, why should one's science values never be questioned? Aren't the values of science, of empirical evidence, logically defensible in themselves?
 
paddoboy said:
On most science forums it is trolling, yes.
It is done to flame and promote discourse, frustration and anger among the more logical thinking people and any scientists, especially when it is done with no real evidence.
Yep, we have the fringe sections on this forum for all the nonsense, but even then, some of what is proposed deserves refutation.
Just because you post in the woo section, does not mean that your woo should go unchallenged and not be refuted and called for what it really is.
This is first and foremost a science forum, for the promotion of science, speculative ideas and hypothesis, and all should be governed by the scientific method.
Claiming ghosts exist because of an individual's say so, is not real evidence.
Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary evidence.
Click to expand...

So I guess every post in the political subforum, the religion subforum, the ethics subforum, the arts subforum, the world events subforum, the free thought subforum, the mathematics subforum, the history subforum, and the philosophy subforum should be backed by scientific evidence? Is that what you are saying? Or are you just holding the fringe subforum to a higher "scientific" standard to prevent people from posting evidence there ?
 
Last edited:
Magical Realist said:
So I guess every post in the political subforum, the religion subforum, the ethics subforum, the arts subforum, the world events subforum, the free thought subforum, and the philosophy subforum should be backed by scientific evidence? Is that what you are saying? Or are you just holding the fringe subforum to a higher "scientific" standard to prevent people from posting evidence there ?
Click to expand...


I'm holding all forums to the same standards.
And at the foundation of that standard is the scientific method.
In other words anyone posting in the fringe forums should still be subject to the basis of the scientific method and the critical and probing questions that will most certainly be asked.
  • Ask a Question or make an observation:
  • Conduct the necessary research:
  • Construct a Hypothesis:
  • Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment:
  • Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion:
  • Communicate Your Results:
  • Be prepared for critical questions and probing:
  • Be prepared for peer review:
  • Change, modify or discard your hypothesis as necessary and if the above is not all favourable:
 
paddoboy said:
I'm holding all forums to the same standards.
And at the foundation of that standard is the scientific method.
In other words anyone posting in the fringe forums should still be subject to the basis of the scientific method and the critical and probing questions that will most certainly be asked.
  • Ask a Question or make an observation:
  • Conduct the necessary research:
  • Construct a Hypothesis:
  • Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment:
  • Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion:
  • Communicate Your Results:
  • Be prepared for critical questions and probing:
  • Be prepared for peer review:
  • Change, modify or discard your hypothesis as necessary and if the above is not all favourable:
Click to expand...

Hey everybody! Paddoboy wants all statements in every subforum here to be backed by the scientific method. LOL! Otherwise you're just trolling. Hey, I wonder if the moral claim that science MUST BE backed by the scientific method is backed by the scientific method? I hope so, otherwise it's just trolling.
 
Magical Realist said:
Hey everybody! Paddoboy wants all statements in every subforum here to be backed by the scientific method. LOL! Otherwise you're just trolling. Hey, I wonder if the moral claim that science MUST BE backed by the scientific method is backed by the scientific method? I hope so, otherwise it's just trolling.
Click to expand...


Now you are just being silly aren't you?
 
If you don't want your ideas to follow and be critiqued by the scientific method, why would you be posting on a science forum in the first place? Why not just join a ghosts forum, or a UFO forum, or a bigfoot forum, or whatever type of forum is more relevant to whatever unscentific subject you're talking about?
 
Daecon said:
It is when the anti-scientific people are adamant that they're right, all of science and the scientific method is wrong and do the equivalent of sticking their fingers in their ears going "la-la-la I can't hear you".
Click to expand...


Exactly...Just had one recently perm banned theorist constant. They are not interested in hearing anything that doesn't align with their nonsensical take on science, life or whatever.
 
Magical Realist said:
Hey everybody! Paddoboy wants all statements in every subforum here to be backed by the scientific method. LOL! Otherwise you're just trolling. Hey, I wonder if the moral claim that science MUST BE backed by the scientific method is backed by the scientific method? I hope so, otherwise it's just trolling.
Click to expand...


The point is Magical ol son, on most science forums, people pushing what you push would not get a leg in the door. There is another I was part of that gave all alternative hypothesis pushers or any non scientific concept, one month to validate their claims. Then there thread was closed.
 
paddoboy said:
The point is Magical ol son, on most science forums, people pushing what you push would not get a leg in the door. There is another I was part of that gave all alternative hypothesis pushers or any non scientific concept, one month to validate their claims. Then there thread was closed.
Click to expand...

There are whole subforums devoted to the paranormal, ufos, and monsters here. Or haven't you noticed.? So obviously threads on that topic are to be welcomed here and encouraged. And to remain on topic, to post threads in these subforums on these topics is not the definition of trolling.
 
Last edited:
Daecon said:
If you don't want your ideas to follow and be critiqued by the scientific method, why would you be posting on a science forum in the first place? Why not just join a ghosts forum, or a UFO forum, or a bigfoot forum, or whatever type of forum is more relevant to whatever unscentific subject you're talking about?
Click to expand...

We have whole subforums devoted to these topics here. So obviously threads on these are accepted and encouraged. If you don't like them, then don't read them. Simple as that..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top