I think that the word "troll" is very
overused. To my way of
thinking, it refers to a person who is "trolling" as a joke or
something. Sincere people with strange ideas are not trolls. Even
sincere people who are hostile, argumentative, uncooperative are not
trolls. A troll is _insincere_, that is, they say things only for the
shock value, only for the purpose of upsetting people.
Agreed. I think the word is slung around a little too freely.
1. The Cunctator is not a troll. He sincerely cares about the project and has contributed
a lot of valuable material, including our current logo. He is also a shit-disturber (I say
that with some affection) and got into a personal feud with Larry Sanger. That doesn't
make him a troll.
2. Mirwin is not a troll. He came into Wikipedia and, like many newcommers, brought up
what he considered to be major issues, but most people disagreed with his assessments. He
has some unusual ideas, has a rather rambling style of expressing himself, and seems to be
quite fond of the idea of forking the project, but I haven't seen him do any
intentional trolling.
3. I'm not sure whether 24 means to troll or not. He has been downright prolific on
the meta, pumping out his ideas on what he sees as the major problems of Wikipedia, and
the possible solutions. He seems intelligent, but very narrowly focused, and desires to
change the basic nature of Wikipedia. He ignores community standards, and gets upset that
we even call ourselves a community. He also has extensive insults for people that
don't want to play his game by his rules. Strange? Yes. Troll? Not sure. Ban him? No
way. It would set a dangerous precident, and wouldn't be very effective anyway.
It's trivial to alter one's apparent IP address over the web.
-- Stephen G.
--
________________________________
Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia
http://www.wikipedia.com
_______________________________________________
Download the free Opera browser at
http://www.opera.com/
Powered by Outblaze