Jump to content
meowkitty

Trolling and the internet.

Recommended Posts

^ possibly the greatest post in this thread, sums everything up quite nicely, no wonder you didn't get any replies.

 

I think you're bang-on the money.

 

 

I'll add to this thread too.

From what I've seen personally, so I'm assuming it is most cases, just because I've met a lot of trolls; People who are bullied IRL tend to be the biggest trolls. I think the reasons behind this would be: They're too scared to speak out against a bully, and take their frustrations out elsewhere, and just think about what they COULD have said, this can be used as weaponry against a target.

Makes sense in my head anyways. And like I said, it's just from what I've seen personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately "maxpower118" <-- (Great alias =/) had his/her page deleted so I can only see the aftermath, I wish someone screen-shotted or something. I heard about this on the radio this morning.

 

EDIT: Really interested in what the initial comments were.

Edited by ilyria109

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.geordieguy.com/2012/09/more-troll-scandals/

 

According to morning TV an NRL player who recently lost his mother to cancer has been mocked by a Twitter user.  This rounds out a couple of fairly trying weeks with the media and politicians rallying against mean people on the Internet.

While I understand what it’s like to lose a mother to cancer personally, I still advocate for we need some perspective in what seems like an interminable debate about people being nasty and craven online and what should happen to them when they do.  In order to help with this perspective, I’m running a poll where people can choose what should happen to the troll who rubbed salt into the heartbreak of an NRL player who has lost his mother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, the problem also lies with the administrators or powers that be of that medium. One thing I've noticed, both here and in other places that have a cyberbullying problem, is that the people in charge don't know what they want to be promoting. I'd like to think the owners of Twitter don't want their forum to be used as a haven of vitriol and hate, but I imagine they also have the problem of do they stifle what people have to say? It's the classic free speech problem really - free speech is a wonderful thing but it also brings out the worst in people. Online admin seem to be having a hard time deciding where on the spectrum they want to fall. I think perhaps they need to make their stances of what is tolerated or what is not more clear - if they're going to allow weapons-free, they need to warn people of that, preferably before signup. If they're not going to allow people to bully others, they need to state that clearly and then they need to enforce it. There's too much grey right now.

 

It's not going to be an easy thing to do and it will be one of the great challenges of the next decade in terms of the internet. Personally I don't want to see a police state of regulations, but I also believe strongly in the internet being a place where people can come and engage in a community without the threat of being persecuted or harassed.

 

It's a tough one.

Next decade, it's been too hard for the last decade also.

 

the way I see it is that many on the internet are content focused and let the touchy feely stuff fall to the enforcement of the forum rules. sometimes rules are just the hive mind of the Mods on what they see as right for a forum.

any mature forum has rules built from the need to consitently deal with shit and to inform those who come later what the rules of engagement are.

the worst thing I found about it as a mod was that every time you foot needs to be put down, you knwo you are putting it down on sand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're on twitter, you're a twit.

 

If you use twitter like a public SMS service about all your inner thoughts, you're an even bigger twit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're on twitter, you're a twit.

 

If you use twitter like a public SMS service about all your inner thoughts, you're an even bigger twit.

Just coz you're a twit doesn't mean you deserve to be picked on, or have your belongings glued to the roof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, the problem also lies with the administrators or powers that be of that medium. One thing I've noticed, both here and in other places that have a cyberbullying problem, is that the people in charge don't know what they want to be promoting. I'd like to think the owners of Twitter don't want their forum to be used as a haven of vitriol and hate, but I imagine they also have the problem of do they stifle what people have to say? It's the classic free speech problem really - free speech is a wonderful thing but it also brings out the worst in people. Online admin seem to be having a hard time deciding where on the spectrum they want to fall. I think perhaps they need to make their stances of what is tolerated or what is not more clear - if they're going to allow weapons-free, they need to warn people of that, preferably before signup. If they're not going to allow people to bully others, they need to state that clearly and then they need to enforce it. There's too much grey right now.

 

It's not going to be an easy thing to do and it will be one of the great challenges of the next decade in terms of the internet. Personally I don't want to see a police state of regulations, but I also believe strongly in the internet being a place where people can come and engage in a community without the threat of being persecuted or harassed.

 

It's a tough one.

Next decade, it's been too hard for the last decade also.

 

the way I see it is that many on the internet are content focused and let the touchy feely stuff fall to the enforcement of the forum rules. sometimes rules are just the hive mind of the Mods on what they see as right for a forum.

any mature forum has rules built from the need to consitently deal with shit and to inform those who come later what the rules of engagement are.

the worst thing I found about it as a mod was that every time you foot needs to be put down, you knwo you are putting it down on sand.

 

I was defamed by a forums moderator and it went on too past forum admins and moderators kept the pace of attacks on me. I also have a number emails from the ISP involved they know about it and where concerned over what was happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just coz you're a twit doesn't mean you deserve to be picked on, or have your belongings glued to the roof.

If you hang out in a lion's den, there's a slightly elevated risk of being mauled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest xyzzy frobozz

Just coz you're a twit doesn't mean you deserve to be picked on, or have your belongings glued to the roof.

If you hang out in a lion's den, there's a slightly elevated risk of being mauled.

 

I agree with that.

 

But I also argue that just because you're on Twithead or Facestab, doesn't give you the right to say whatever the hell you want. Perhaps if there were some repercussions, people would think before writing their stupid rubbish and pumping it out onto the blogosphere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just coz you're a twit doesn't mean you deserve to be picked on, or have your belongings glued to the roof.

If you hang out in a lion's den, there's a slightly elevated risk of being mauled.

 

I don't really believe what I said, I just wanted to throw in a joke about the Roald Dahl book :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just coz you're a twit doesn't mean you deserve to be picked on, or have your belongings glued to the roof.

If you hang out in a lion's den, there's a slightly elevated risk of being mauled.

 

I don't really believe what I said, I just wanted to throw in a joke about the Roald Dahl book :P

 

Points have been awarded!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Charlotte so loveth the world,

her publicity stunt impressed the Lord,

who madeth her pipe-dream real:

and lo the angels laughed in heaven,

the skies were filled with kittens, and rainbows, and strawberry kisses,

and nobody ever said a hurtful or angry word on Twitter again.

And lo, it was good.

 

 

Interesting thread - and one that I've been wondering whether to weigh in on given it's been a sensitive subject for me in the past, but I figured I might as well go ahead and share if anyone can take any benefit away from it.

 

I've had a fair bit of experience with cyberbullying in the past on this very forum. Stating that might get people on the wrong foot to begin with, but I'm not going to point fingers or carry on old grudges here, it's more to illustrate that the problem can exist anywhere.

 

It's not just a case of hardening the fuck up. It's honestly one of the phrases I hate most in the world - it's uncaring, it's dismissive, and it's the kind of thought that fills graveyards. People are expected to be unthinking unemotional robots at the flick of some kind of mental switch, and that's just not possible and it shouldn't really even be required. Bottom line is, we're humans - we feel, and we can be hurt, mentally. That has to be understood, because people are going to continue to be victims if their only choice is something they cannot just do. Ask somebody who tells you to HTFU how exactly you go about doing that. They won't be able to answer you.

 

Honest truth is that the responsibility lies with a little bit of everybody rather than just one party. The person being targeted can definitely benefit from simply refusing to give those people the time of day (and truth be told I wish I had done that a lot more in the past) - it isn't easy when people are biting and chewing on your sore spots and hurting you mentally, but you have to realise that by lashing out and 'defending' yourself you're just giving them what they want. In the end, does anybody really care about what a bunch of sad, angry little people who have to resort to slagging people off on the internet think of you? Very few do, so you shouldn't either. It is not an easy thing to do, and truth be told it required me being in a job where you're likely to approach hostility quite a bit to build up a better resistance, but it can be done.

 

However, this doesn't absolve the bully. In the end, this faceless medium can very easily give you feelings of power and lack of consequence where you can say vile, horrible things to people without the usual risk of being punished - punched out, reported to your boss, called out by your mates, etcetera. I've seen cases of people who are upstanding moral citizens in the real world become absolute vipers on this medium. Perhaps it's not being able to actually witness the outcome of your behaviour - I'd wager that the lady who slagged off Charlotte Dawson is feeling pretty guilty right now - any mentally stable person would. But ultimately I think there does need to be a lot more of people looking inside themselves and saying 'is this how I want people to see me?' along with the old golden rule, 'treat people how you would like to be treated'. Ultimately, think to yourself - what would your reaction be if your spouse, boss, family, etcetera found out you were acting like this? I guess I've been guilty of behaving badly like that myself - sour snark and exaggeration tends to make one look like a colossal douchebag. I find a lot of people don't seem to want to do that, because to do that involves taking responsibility for your actions, looking inside yourself and finding something about yourself that you really don't like.

 

Finally, the problem also lies with the administrators or powers that be of that medium. One thing I've noticed, both here and in other places that have a cyberbullying problem, is that the people in charge don't know what they want to be promoting. I'd like to think the owners of Twitter don't want their forum to be used as a haven of vitriol and hate, but I imagine they also have the problem of do they stifle what people have to say? It's the classic free speech problem really - free speech is a wonderful thing but it also brings out the worst in people. Online admin seem to be having a hard time deciding where on the spectrum they want to fall. I think perhaps they need to make their stances of what is tolerated or what is not more clear - if they're going to allow weapons-free, they need to warn people of that, preferably before signup. If they're not going to allow people to bully others, they need to state that clearly and then they need to enforce it. There's too much grey right now.

 

It's not going to be an easy thing to do and it will be one of the great challenges of the next decade in terms of the internet. Personally I don't want to see a police state of regulations, but I also believe strongly in the internet being a place where people can come and engage in a community without the threat of being persecuted or harassed.

 

It's a tough one.

no it isnt.

 

people just need to HTFU.

 

heres something to consider: sometimes when people say that, its a gesture somewhere between apathy and outright hatred — but its just as likely to contain a measure of compassion. yes, thats right. it can be a terse but heartfelt appeal to practicality, to pragmatism, to reason.

 

in the latter case, its NOT simply a ludicrous directive to instantly grow thick skin, or keep exposing yourself to barbs with the reckless hope of amassing just enough scar tissue to hold your blood loss in check. nay, it means "get real". it means, for the good of yourself and everyone else, stop what you are doing and make an honest appraisal of the situation. it means, if your skin is so easily broken, accept that the onus may be on you to take practical steps to limit your exposure to harm.

 

ideally, a significant other in your life will have already nurtured your understanding of the fact that accepting many a hard truth can prevent your dealing with even harder ones, and this is actually something you should take solace in. but if not, its worth remembering that since everyone 'out there' is not your mummy or daddy, its not their job to explain everything, or sugar coat anything. but at least some are willing to throw people a fricken bone. a correct response might be: "thanks".

 

you may think HTFU is an offensive term in this instance, but perhaps its no less offensive than those who are actually so ignorant, so unthinking, and indeed arrogant enough to simply assume their problems should automatically become everyone elses. to actually start from a position that personal responsibility should be optional.

 

asking Twitter to police bullying? this is like attending a concert, getting elbowed in the face inside the mosh pit, and then returning with a note from your mum imploring the venue "to please ensure the mosh pit is less mean in future". um...no. how about you go and eat a bag of cocks? hell, eat ten. soak em in cyanide and petrol first, and then stick your fucking head in a toaster you hapless perpetual victim.

 

if youre shocked by the violence of this imagery, then consider that its proportionate to what is actually at stake here. it comes from a place of egalitarian, utilitarian, and altruistic respect for personal freedoms, and eyes-wide-open indignation at all those who would threaten these things, unwittingly or not.

 

yes, there's bad apples in mosh pits who will elbow you in the face on purpose. but the answer isnt to employ a group of staff to monitor the pit, issue three-strikes-and-youre-out infringement notices, distribute free "gentle moshing is good moshing" stickers, or anything else so patently impractical and daft. all things being equal, responsibility for stray elbows should not lie with venues at all.

 

to even suggest that Twitter etc should or could centrally police bullying isnt just shit-for-brains thinking, its Stephen Conroy-esque oxygen thievery at its finest. its evil masquerading as care.

 

to think social media companies could do such a thing without creating monstrous juggernauts within their organisations specifically tasked with the administration and continuous monitoring and review of all communications, constantly calculating the exact thresholds whereby a number of mean comments does or does not equate to bullying, handling the thousands of appeals to actions taken — and, that all this could be done without curtailments to our existing freedoms that would not ultimately be more dangerous than beneficial — is naive in the extreme.

 

should we casually feed a mindset that would actually make a perfect precursor for the easy creation of a global Ministry Of Truth, all because some individuals are incapable of attending a concert without straying where they dont belong? nope.

 

the obvious retort to that: what about people like that footballer who had those disgusting comments made about his late wife? what about people like that kid i defended here? what about all those people who just want to attend a concert, and never go near the mosh pit — what happens when they are elbowed in the face?

 

too bad.

 

i say that without joy, and specifically to address the infeasibility of central policing. our starting point should be wholesale acceptance that this sort of thing can and does happen, and the necessity of a degree of personal responsibility. we certainly shouldnt waste time thinking any human authority can prevent the communicative byproducts of human nature.

 

'policing' cyber-bullying should happen at a localised, and grass roots level; through the reactions of those ever more willing to tell aggressors to 'lay off', through employers etc who take disciplinary action against identified douchebags, through individuals who accept their part in limiting their exposure to harm, and through the proactive education of parents and teachers and government programs aimed at making everyone forewarned and forearmed when it comes to the potential risks of online existence and concurrent strategies for harm minimisation.

 

i am inclined to think that if we do nothing more than the above, we can keep the freedoms we should hold sacrosanct, and, well before one generation who has never known a world without social-networking is contemplating the fate of the next, bulling will be no more endemic to society than it was before all this technology came along.

 

in short, this is a shitstorm over a highly manageable problem. but OMG there's nothing to stop enough misguided do-gooders from making things far worse!

Edited by @~thehung

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's an interesting read @~thehung but I'm mighty glad of your edit :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@~thehung for Supreme (benevolent) Evil Overlord.

 

David give the man his headset already.

 

A clip in honour of your greatness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have some form of conduct with operators of Social Media sites ,such as licensing or Qualifications. Forums and Sites are too open and Operators tend not to get involved in such matters like the Twatter one. It could have been stopped but they let if go for promoting twatter in the media. Same with forums bullies are allowed to throw their weight around and no one seems to do anything. I think having a licence or qualification to allow you to operate forums under a policing code might prevent this ,but yet again the Internet is a open place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone reading the newspapers about this incident? It seems the powers in parliament have been stirred with the Attorney General , Nicola Roxon now getting involved.

 

Just wondering what they will do and Rudd of course is joining the campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone reading the newspapers about this incident? It seems the powers in parliament have been stirred with the Attorney General , Nicola Roxon now getting involved.

 

Just wondering what they will do and Rudd of course is joining the campaign.

 

I wish they'd just shut the fuck up about it and worry about running the country not some fucking retard who got called some names on the internet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have some form of conduct with operators of Social Media sites ,such as licensing or Qualifications. Forums and Sites are too open and Operators tend not to get involved in such matters like the Twatter one. It could have been stopped but they let if go for promoting twatter in the media. Same with forums bullies are allowed to throw their weight around and no one seems to do anything. I think having a licence or qualification to allow you to operate forums under a policing code might prevent this ,but yet again the Internet is a open place.

That's the dumbest fucking thing I have read all month.

 

I just don't know what else to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have some form of conduct with operators of Social Media sites ,such as licensing or Qualifications. Forums and Sites are too open and Operators tend not to get involved in such matters like the Twatter one. It could have been stopped but they let if go for promoting twatter in the media. Same with forums bullies are allowed to throw their weight around and no one seems to do anything. I think having a licence or qualification to allow you to operate forums under a policing code might prevent this ,but yet again the Internet is a open place.

That's the dumbest fucking thing I have read all month.

 

I just don't know what else to say.

 

Really? What would your alternative be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted Image

 

I was going to vote no but it seems you cant

 

Posted Image

 

100% of our pole says "yes" this is continuing to push the make it up as you go narrative for data retention laws.

 

Daily Telegraph: Don’t let unpaid trolls take our job That can mean only one thing More redundancies at News Corp.

 

 

http://www.geordieguy.com/2012/09/trolling...ional-security/

 

Someone just shoot me now.

Edited by mudg3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see no problem with the internet as it exists today.

 

If people don't like it they don't have to use it.

Edited by A Hitman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×