• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

This forum is way more friendly than alt.comp.xxx groups

"Terry Yager" wrote:

> I think there's a distinction between a good troll
> and outright flame-bait. Flame-bait is usually quite
> obvious to all who view it, where a troll is more
> subtle. The person being trolled shouldn't be aware
> that it is a troll until after they have made an ass
> of themself. Creating a true troll (as opposed to
> plain-vanilla flame-bait) is something of an art
> form. It requires a good deal of care and imagination
> to be able to troll without being "caught" by being
> too obvious.

Well, occasionally I've done this, which is the biggest
problem I have with Usenet, by talking about stuff related,
but off-topic & occasionally I've gone completely off-topic by
talking about stuff which others have laid out. Generally
depends on the individual in this case, to people who've use
Usenet for a long time & by that I mean before WWW came around
& the 'net was more accessible to the public (which in a way
doesn't include schools - after all I think that's one of the
groups who used to use this system), so really Usenet is
nothing like it once was. Have a look at it through Google
Groups & you can see what I mean. Back in the '80s for example
trolling or flaming wasn't evident, in particular people were
more than helpful in posting useful articles & other posts in
the form of newsletters were posted for interested people. I
believe that since the public have come in it's been more
debates, flaming & trolling. Having little care for a fairly
old system & failing to see what it means.

Usenet is supposed to be more about helping people depending
on the group, so a group on programming languages would help
people with querys on that language (or it could even be used
to post programs), comp.os.cpm can relate to things relating
to this os, including computers, maybe languages (in general),
software announcements & anyone who needs help with CP/M.
alt.folklore.computers actually beats me in terms of what they
do, but it seems the comments relate to earlier Systems of the
earlier generations. Some argue that Micros belong there, but
unless they have their own group, it's not really advisable to
post in there.

Cheers,
CP/M User.
 
Last edited:
vic user wrote:

> Maybe it is just me, but I feel far more comfortable
> asking questions on this forum, than I do on the
> alt.comp.XXX groups I belong to.

Yeah & there's a bit more control as to what goes on here.

> It seems there is a percentage of patronizing or
> snobbish people on some of those groups, and I have
> encountered none of this on Erik's forum.

Occasionally depends though which Forums you go to as well, I
mean on occasion you have to watch out what you say. Then
there's those forums which are almost like your walking into
somebodies else's domain - they can say anything & get away
with blue murder & you get whipped if you print something.

Overall though, Forums over Usenet - least they offer anybody
to comment from past posts (you can only go so far back with
Usenet). And we have moderating crews which keeps things in
check! :-D

CP/M User.
 
Terry Yager said:
Yeah, but most of us are just lurkers on usenet...and the rest of us are trollers. (I confess, I've done my share of trolling there).

--T
Click to expand...

As long as trolling is truly recognizable as maybe some ironic humour, I'm ok with it- certainly if from otherwise helpful people. But there are too many there that just troll and flame without any other contribution.

And yes, this forum is great. It's not yet my homepage, but in the top 5 :)
 
Jorg wrote:

> As long as trolling is truly recognizable as maybe
> some ironic humour, I'm ok with it- certainly if from
> otherwise helpful people. But there are too many
> there that just troll and flame without any other
> contribution.

eek! I hope this doesn't mean Terry will start deleting our
posts! :-D

CP/M User.
 
CP/M User said:
Jorg wrote:

> As long as trolling is truly recognizable as maybe
> some ironic humour, I'm ok with it- certainly if from
> otherwise helpful people. But there are too many
> there that just troll and flame without any other
> contribution.

eek! I hope this doesn't mean Terry will start deleting our
posts! :-D

CP/M User.
Click to expand...

I meant in alt.comp.xxx ;)
 
Oh, so someone has revived this old thread. I don't actively engage in much trolling activity any more, but I think my past experience helps in moderating these forums, because I can usually spot a troll and hopefully, nip it in the bud. Trolling is a game, in the sense of a con-game, and therefore follows the same formula as a con-game. A game unfolds like this:

A game *always* starts with a 'gimmick' (a psychological need or desire). Everyone has gimmicks, and a good con/troll can spot those gimmicks, and exploit them. Some are easier to spot than others, like educators, whose gimmick is out front and visible to all ('I'm the allmighty teacher, and I know stuff that you don't, so shut up and learn from me'). In order for the game to commence, it is a (usually) simple matter of 'hooking' that person/group's gimmick, with a 'con' (a way of exploiting a gimmick). After you have the 'mark' hooked, you pull the 'switch', in which you become the aggressor, which leads to a 'cross-up', or confusion on the part of the mark, as he first begins to realize that he's been had. This then leads to the 'pay-off' stage, where the troll feels superior to the trollee, who OTOH, feels like a st00pit ass.

For those who weren't following closely, the formula is: Con Hooks Gimmick, pulls Switch, followed by Cross-up & Pay-off. See how eazy?

--T
 
Last edited:
Terry Yager said:
Oh, so someone has revived this old thread. I don't actively engage in much trollong activity any more, but I think my past experience helps in moderating these forums, because I can usually spot a troll and hopefully, nip it in the bud. Trolling is a game, in the sense of a con-game, and therefore follows the same formula as a con-game. A game unfolds like this:

A game *always* starts with a 'gimmick' (a psychological need or desire). Everyone has gimmicks, and a good con/troll can spot those gimmicks, and exploit them. Some are easier to spot than others, like educators, whose gimmick is out front and visible to all ('I'm the allmighty teacher, and I know stuff that you don't, so shut up and learn from me'). In order for the game to commence, it is a (usually) simple matter of 'hooking' that person/group's gimmick, with a 'con' (a way of exploiting a gimmick). After you have the 'mark' hooked, you pull the 'switch', in which you become the aggressor, which leads to a 'cross-up', or confusion on the part of the mark, as he first begins to realize that he's been had. This then leads to the 'pay-off' stage, where the troll feels superior to the trollee, who OTOH, feels like a st00pit ass.

For those who weren't following closely, the formula is: Con Hooks Gimmick, pulls Switch, followed by Cross-up & Pay-off. See how eazy?

--T
Click to expand...

People that store lots of stuff and can't throw things away tend to compose long posts to hide their uncertainty in life.
 
Jorg said:
People that store lots of stuff and can't throw things away tend to compose long posts to hide their uncertainty in life.
Click to expand...

This is a classic example of a trolling message, but since I didn't fall for it, then I win, right?

Of course, some would argue that since I am responding, that the troll waz successful and that I have been trolled. I don't think that the rule applies in this case, if we treat this as a purely pedantic exercize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedantic

(See, that's my gimmick -- I like to teach people too, so I guess I'm a closet collaborator, but for me, it's just a hobby, rather than my chosen profession).

I used to love trolling groups such as alt.k-12.edu, or whatever. but eventually, even that amusement came to be a chore, so I've pretty much given up that passtime.

--T
 
Last edited:
Terry Yager said:
This is a classic example of a trolling message, but since I didn't fall for it, then I win, right?

Of course, some would argue that since I am responding, that I have been trolled. I don't think that rule applies in this case, if we treat this as a purely pedantic exercize.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedantic

(See, that's my gimmick -- I like to teach people too, so I guess I'm a closet collaborator, but for me, it's just a hobby, rather than my chosen profession).

--T
Click to expand...

You won, or at least did not lose, because it was a classic troll message (nice try, don't you think?)- but the purpose in this case was to lend you a hand to prove your point (as I do gather you noticed ;) )
 
Jorg said:
You won, or at least did not lose, because it was a classic troll message (nice try, don't you think?)- but the purpose in this case was to lend you a hand to prove your point (as I do gather you noticed ;) )
Click to expand...

Well, yah...a purely pedantic study.

--T
 
The kinda conz we all hafta watch out for in these forumz are the onez that hook into our love of vintage computerz, and our desire to commune & share with otherz of similar tastes. I mean, someone posting a message like 'What iz better, PCs or Macs?' iz an obvious troll, meant to incite a flame-war over a strictly 'Religious Issue'. Other 'inflamatory behavior', such as posts the likes of 'You're all a buncha idjits if you still love & wanna use dat old-sk00l tech...', etc, are conz, meant to hook our gimmicks and cauze a reaction of some sort. The only 'proper' reaction to such posts iz to simply ignore them, in hopes that the unsucessful troller will soon get bored and go away. Counter-trolling just seems to have the wrong effect, often inciting more of the same behavior, once the troll knowz that he haz someone hooked. Unless you're *really* good at it, this method should not be attempted...The troller will make mince-meat of you;

Trolling, if it's done well, usually iz better done much more subtely than theze examplez. If the troll iz too obvious, it won't go over, especially among those experienced enough to recognize a troll when they see one. There iz still some disagreement among trollerz as to whether 'Don't feed the troll' messages are counted as victories or not, but I'm a pureist...I only count a troll as successful if the trollee doesn't realize he's been trolled till after the payoff. 'Don't feed daTroll' messages just indicate that the troller has been busted, therefore, unsucessful.

--T
 
Last edited:
Terry Yager wrote:

> Oh, so someone has revived this old thread.

I'm that someone! :-D

I poped the subject back because some Guest was reading it!
And because there were some things which hadn't been
discussed. I don't believe I was trolling - if that's what
you're implying (I a little confused as well).

CP/M User.
 
I mined the usenet for years for info on the many diffferent platforms I had. To me the most hostile was the comp.sys.apple, where there was always a general war going on and the second was the comp.sys.amiga where devotion to Amiga and hatred of the Atari ST determined whether or not you might be responded to.
The most welcoming were the comp.sys.ibm.ps2 and the comp.sys.cpm.
In between the others you might be welcolmed, branded as a phiistine, or ignored as a newby. One approached the alt groups with caution.

In the early years the most informative and comfortable groups were the Fido ones, usually accessed from BBS'.
True there could be authoritarian moderators on some groups, given the organizable nature of FIDO, but I miss the feel of community one found there. There's a sense of impersonality that was very evident on usenet at the time when it and Fido coexisted and still lives to this day.

Lawrence
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top