On 8/1/07, Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/2/07, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
If the word is being used in this way, it conveys less meaning.
That's what it means, irrelevant of how much meaning it conveys.
I disagree that's what it means. It may be what it means to SOME PEOPLE, myself not among them. It's also the case that if you use a word with ambiguous meaning, either meaning may be assumed by some. Thus, perhaps, it's a bad choice of word; it will be interpreted by some as being an accusation of bad faith and deliberate provocation for the purposes of amusement.
The problem is that 'troll' has become such a loaded word on Wikipedia that it is now best avoided.
"A loaded word"? As opposed to... I don't know... say... rape?
Oskar, I'm trying to understand this comment of yours. I neither used the word 'rape' nor compared or opposed the use of 'troll' to the use of 'rape'.
You seem to be suggesting that I can't take issue with describing someone as a troll because that same person is making rape comparisons. Others had already called that out; I saw no need to add to it.
-Matt