Skip to main content

View Diary: To The Trollkeepers - A Paean (133 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I admit to curiosity, if nothing else. (6+ / 0-)

    I don't believe that most of the people yelling "Troll!" believe that their targets are more than adversarial nuisances. I also don't think I can sustain the level of suspicion that would seem to be warranted for the job you're trying to do, but it would be good to have more information.

    At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

    by serendipityisabitch on Fri Jan 03, 2014 at 05:15:41 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Check us out. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      serendipityisabitch, Mike Kahlow

      You may be disappointed by how little we actually do and how blatant our eventual targets are,

      © Tomtech! My comments may not be used without my permission outside of the post which it is posted in..

      by Tomtech on Fri Jan 03, 2014 at 05:30:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I used Trolls as my gateway to dkos for several (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tomtech, Hey338Too, fcvaguy

        months - until the supply dried up for a while. Taught me a lot about the community, or at least a particular subset...

        At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

        by serendipityisabitch on Fri Jan 03, 2014 at 05:41:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  and actually (3+ / 0-)

      the closeted third party trolls are far worse than the right wing trolls.

      •  Okay, now you've got me curious. I assume you (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fcvaguy, Tomtech

        have at least strong anecdotal evidence behind that - can you give the gist of it without naming names?

        At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

        by serendipityisabitch on Fri Jan 03, 2014 at 11:00:29 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Its no secret (6+ / 0-)

          They eventually show up on the banned list, or if you've been here for awhile, you get to know them.

          There are all sorts of trolls here with a plethora of agendas. They all have something in common - to divide the community.

          There was a rather effective one who was posing as a black woman living in the projects who's purpose was to undermine AA support for Obama and give ammunition to those here who were happy to see it happen.

          There was another who posed as a fake gay young man. His agenda remains a mystery to me but he also tossed the entire community into turmoil leaving many people seriously damaged.

          There has even been a famous blogger/now "journalist" who trolled here to also fan the flames of anti-Obama sentiment.

          •  Yes. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            triv33, Tomtech

            They openly advocate for a third party, they get banned. Pretty straightforward.

            All those others "you get to know" are sure to slip up eventually, right?

            And when they do...zap!

            Which makes me wonder how they manage to survive around here for so long before this happens.

            I'm curious, what are the little "signs" we should look for?

            Marked "anti-Obama" sentiment?
            Repeated expression of disillusionment with the Democratic Party?
            Noticeable lack of interest in voting?
            Showing "libertarian" tendencies?




            Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

            by DeadHead on Fri Jan 03, 2014 at 11:39:33 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  None of those are particularly telling (5+ / 0-)

              The vast majority of people here have expressed some form of disappointment with Obama and Democratic Party in one way or another. And, even Markos is a self-avowed libertarian Democrat.

              My observations are my own regarding the plethora of types of trolls. IMO, there isn't just one type. There are many. If you want to learn about the various types of trolls, you can consult one of Hunter's or Markos extensive writings on the subject. Although, Markos tends to call them "dicks".

              •  No, there isn't just one type, but... (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                triv33, Tomtech

                You specifically referred to a particular flavor, above, when you said this:

                and actually ... the closeted third party trolls are far worse than the right wing trolls.
                and then you were asked for more information:
                Okay, now you've got me curious. I assume you ... have at least strong anecdotal evidence behind that - can you give the gist of it without naming names?
                to which you then replied:
                They eventually show up on the banned list, or if you've been here for awhile, you get to know them.
                which I thought was referring to what you said in the topmost blockquote above.

                So I wasn't asking about trolls in general. I know what they are and how they operate. I was asking you what your criteria were for spotting the specific type of 3rd party trolls who are more damaging than RW trolls.

                Is my above reading inaccurate?

                If not, any thoughts?




                Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                by DeadHead on Sat Jan 04, 2014 at 03:33:56 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I mentioned a few types, not one specific type (7+ / 0-)

                  You get to know them....... In the case of the troll posing as a black woman - usually a new member doesn't make a big splash to start. She did. She had an instant fan base. But, along the way people grew suspicious, noted significant inconsistencies in her accounts. Then, someone encouraged a semantic analysis of her writing and convinced TPTB she was indeed a sock of a very nefarious white woman troll who had been here years ago. Perhaps in this case, "sock" would be a better label than "troll".

                  In the case of the journalist, years ago, Markos made a comment that individual had a reputation for trolling the site as well as other sites. In his most recent incarnation, he started off by attacking a well-liked diarist who the SUX side wasn't a fan of; went Godwin and called the diarist a rather unique name. Shortly thereafter, the journalist, using his real name, tweeted an attack on that diarist using the same unique name. In addition, his chosen KOS UID was a unique name the journalist used in the title of an article he had recently written. When he was questioned about that, he was manually banned.

                  There was indeed another I didn't mention. He was new. Started out being a strong Obama/Dem supporter, then over the course of a few months, made a sudden turnabout and became very anti-dem/Anti-Obama which seem incredibly contrived. He befriended many on the SUX side who became fans of his. Once again, inconsistencies were noted. It turned out he was a member of Redstate using the same exact UID name, where he was bragging about how he was playing the left at DailyKOS.

                  So, perhaps when I say "you get to know them", the common denominator is that you start to note inconsistencies and behaviors that don't make sense, as well appearing transparently single agenda driven.

                  •  I'm familiar with the instances... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    serendipityisabitch

                    You mention in your first and third paragraphs, I think, even though I wasn't directly involved in them. I observed them after-the-fact, shortly thereafter in the first of the two, and after returning from a self-induced hiatus from the site, in the second of those two.

                    I suspect the events described in your second paragraph were before my time, but I do recall something being on the front page when I was either still lurking the site, or freshly registered. Something about some person being exposed as a sockpuppet. The FP post was a sort of "shaming." That had to have been around around 2009, so what you're referring to might be something else entirely different and precedent to what I'm thinking of.

                    Still, I hardly see those two instances that I am familiar with as having been something one "gets to know" in terms of being aware of the deception, but tolerant of it over a long period of time, which is what I took to be the gist of your comments above, though I do understand what you're saying in terms of becoming familiar with inconsistencies and patterns and being able to see them more clearly when they show up in new cases, now that you've clarified your point a bit more for me.




                    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                    by DeadHead on Sat Jan 04, 2014 at 03:29:26 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

            •  alas, I have found that to most of us here, (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Hey338Too, fcvaguy, indubitably

              "trolls" simply mean nothing more than "anyone who disagrees with me".  (shrug)

              In the end, reality always wins.

              by Lenny Flank on Sat Jan 04, 2014 at 06:42:22 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  With exceptions... (0+ / 0-)

                I prefer to address the behavior by using the verb form of the word, trolling, as opposed labeling a person using the the noun form. One better avoids receiving HRs that way. Not to mention, it doesn't nullify the entirety of a person's participation here because they're having a day.

                The exceptions being either obvious RW trolls, or, specifically in my personal experience, with a couple of users whose serial trolling has earned them, in my book, the "official" troll designation. I don't call them that as a rule, but that's what they are, in my view.

                And it's not simply because I disagree with their views. It's based on their actions observed over an extended period of time across several diaries and towards multiple users/diarists, and is a sentiment shared by numerous others, as well.

                Disagreeing and trolling aren't the same thing, but the former does have the potential to become the latter when it's done persistently and in complete ignorance of facts that prove the disagreeing party wrong.

                In other words, continuing to disagree and citing debunked "facts" to do it is a form of trolling. People who do this with enough frequency to exhibit a pattern of, or a reputation for doing it, are, as far as I'm concerned, trolls.




                Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

                by DeadHead on Sat Jan 04, 2014 at 05:03:06 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

          •  So, I take it you didn't mean "third party" (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fcvaguy, Tomtech, AnnetteK, Hey338Too

            in the sense of people advocating for a third political party, but only that their interests were pretty much sideways from the actual politics of the site. I read it as something like Naderites or Greens when you first stated it. Isn't the English language fun? Thanks.

            At least half the future I've been expecting hasn't gotten here yet. Sigh.... (Yes, there's gender bias in my name; no, I wasn't thinking about it when I signed up. My apologies.)

            by serendipityisabitch on Sat Jan 04, 2014 at 03:51:59 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site