--- Charles Matthews charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
Mark Richards wrote
You make it sound like 'troll-folk' are
identifiable,
and do nothing but 'troll' (whatever that is).
You make it sound as if you have never come across an actual troll.
Well, in fact, the only time I have felt 'trolled' was by a Wikipedian apparently in good standing.
In fact, this word is almost always applied to
someone
with whom we have a disagreement. It does not
apply to
them in general, usually just the thing we
disagree
with.
Like I said, the term is consistently misused. Like I said, I see nothing funny or interesting in blurring its actual denotation.
I believe that this is entirely subjective. There is nothing about its 'actual denotation' that is not blurred.
This sort of dehumanizing generalisation is not helpful.
It is remarkably helpful to distinguish between rhetorical proponents of strongly-held views, and trolls who (as far as I can see) actually are dependent in a psychological sense on confrontational argument. The difference between needing to see that others hold sincere opposing views, and needing help.
Charles
On the contrary - the claim that the two can be distinguished is entirely unhelpful. It is simply an ad hominim attack dressed up.
Mark
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today! http://my.yahoo.com