On Political Pistachio and my other political blogs this crops up from time to time, and I promise myself that I won't let these freaks get under my skin, but there are about five of them on the internet that really get my hair to rise and somehow find a way to get under my skin. I also have about a dozen minor irritations that call themselves "liberal" e-mailing me as well (the now legendary Mudkitty being one of them).
If only all liberals were as easy to get along with as my good friend Sam, which is pictured behind me in the photograph on the right. When the discussion of Socialized Medicine (Government paid health insurance) came up, he says to me, "Doug, I can't believe you have a problem with free health care."
Okay, stop laughing.
I respond, "It is hardly free. It comes out of your tax dollars, and in Canada the citizens still need to buy health insurance to supplement their socialized care because the government only covers so much. Besides, don't you want to have a choice, rather than be controlled into only accepting whatever the government desires you to have?"
"Nah," he says, "I don't want to have to think about it. One less thing to worry about."
Then he says, "Besides, it'll give them something to spend money on other than this illegal war."
"How is our military operations illegal?" I asked.
"I don't know," says Sam. "That's what the news says."
I love ya, Sam, and we will always be friends, but sometimes you amaze me with your politically simple mind.
Well, Lance, Ollie, Caday5, Tom, Fred, and BallBuster are not nearly as simple minded. In fact, two of them, Caday5 and Tom, are on the constant attack and can be quite relentless (and ruthless). Lance and Fred are classic elitists, with Lance beginning his attacks by telling me it was my turn to be picked on. He blogged about me, commented on my WordPress Site and old FreeWebs site, and then fizzled into obscurity. I didn't even have to get rid of him. And Ollie and BallBuster have finally quit trying to jump my blocks and bans, though Ollie, from what I hear, continues to be a royal pain in the butt around the MySpace Conservative Sites.
Wait a second, Doug, did you say blocks and bans? Doesn't that make you a. . . (play dramatic music) - - - (pause for effect) - - - Coward?
Not really. In fact, I have never banned or blocked Caday5, because at least he debates me with his feet on the ground, and his brain out of his hindquarters (he comments on my Townhall Blog, if you were curious).
Every once in a while I will get a lewd comment on Carried By Christ, or a spam on my other Christian Blog. So far Political Pistachio News has remained free of attacks from the liberal leftinistas.
But why is it that I really don't allow the nastiest of the trolls to comment here (or on my other sites), and don't really find the desire to engage them?
I recognize that like all human beings, I am damaged, fallible, and absolutely capable of being mistaken. The internet is basically full of people (showing up as electronic pixels) that have their faults and their strengths, their convictions, their beliefs, and their failings. On blogs, a relatively new phenomenon for the most part, those that share common interests or common beliefs pour their diverse mass of thoughts into discussions much in a way friends gather to discuss their lives or opinions at a party.
If you have ever been to a party, then you know that parties often come with "party crashers." If the crashers behave themselves, and don't upset the locals, then more often than not they are tolerated and given the okay to remain at the gathering as long as they behave. If, however, the party crasher is disruptive, makes demands that they shouldn't, or simply upsets the person that is giving the party, it is completely within the realm of decency for the host to ask the "crashers" to leave. If the disruptive person (or persons) refuse to depart from the premises, it is completely within the rights of the host to either ask his or her friends to physically eject the disruptors, or for the local authorities to be contacted if things get out of hand. Now, imagine those party crashers that were ejected suddenly crying out, "You are infringing on my right to party! How dare you take my right to party away from me! By kicking me out of your party that makes you a coward!"
Asking a disruptive individual to leave is not the host being a coward. The host is keeping the party pleasant, and enabling the other party-goers the opportunity to continue to enjoy the gathering without the unnecessary disruptions of the offending party(ies). If the party crashers want to party the way they like to party, then they can go host their own party, or go be an ass at a party hosted by one of their friends. The party crashers ought not to create havoc someplace where such disruptive behavior should not have to be tolerated.
Now, imagine if the host said to the party crashers, "I don't like you here, you are disruptive, but have a sandwich and a beer."
Well, that would make no sense at all, would it? After all, if you felt the disruptive person was a problem and needed to leave, why would you feed him and offer him a drink?
Trolls are much like those party crashers, but sometimes can be worse. Not only do they crash the party, but they begin to make demands. Fred, a blogtalkradio troll, actually demanded once that I name contemporary artist on the spot (which, of course, was completely off-topic). He wasn't specific so I named a writer (writers to me are artists). He responded, "See, you can't," and then went on to snivel about him being educated and intelligent and how people like me can't even name contemporary artists. The question was not a question as much as it was a statement. Fred was making the statement that because he can name a contemporary artist and I couldn't, that somehow placed him on a higher level. It made him an elitist that I could never aspire to, in his opinion.
Many of these liberal trolls define their world by "I'm right" and you're either 100% with me or 100% against me. Problem is, when they start pulling this junk, since I am very strong on my convictions, I become sucked in by my own curiosity and confused fascination. Then the rules are tossed out the window, and they, like the party crashers, begin to ignore the wishes of the blogging community around them. They attack mercilessly, using tactics that I would never dream of using, and then when I disagree with them or make a statement in my defense, they choose to either take the disagreement as attack, or as some kind of level of stupidity. They respond to all opposing opinion with condemnation and quite often, profanity-laced anger.
Then, because of our fallible human nature, we take the bait, and the fireworks ensue. The civil disagreement becomes frustration and anger, and then it becomes attack and condemnation. The recipient of the troll attacks, or at least in my case last year, becomes a casualty (meaning I got kicked off quite a few blogrolls because of my "disgraceful troll problem" that was making the publisher of those blogrolls "sick."
It was then that I realized I had a duty to provide a safe and enjoyable environment for my readers and commenters. Problem is, the trolls at that time (Mudkitty and Tom) would not honor my request to cease and desist, so I began to moderate my comment section. That proved to be tiresome and time consuming. Then I decided to change over to Haloscan so that I could effectively "ban" the commenters. Mudkitty has remained banned and off Political Pistachio ever since, but Tom, being the computer genius that he proclaims he is, eventually figured out how to circumvent the ban and has returned to commenting on Political Pistachio (this, after telling me he would be honorable and abide by my "silly" ban). Now, I am back to moderating.
Honestly, this stupidity of attacking sites that disagree with you is a confusing thing to me. I visit liberal sites on rare instances, more often than not I do not comment. It's just bad form. I visit to see what the other side is saying. The blogger is entitled to his or her opinion on his or her blog, and if I don't like their opinion, then I am free to blog on the subject on my own site. This is honorable, in my opinion, and the way it should be. This way the community of my blog, and other blogs, does not wind up in confusion and shock because of the sudden war of words that erupts.
I will have to admit that when I see such interchanges in comment sections, or even find myself participating in such an interchange, it's an amazing thing to watch. People, knowing that they are nothing more than an electronic bundle of pixels, let out their dark side. You begin to see sides of people that you never suspected lurked beneath all the letters they've strung together on the internet. And when a momentary ceasefire emerges, the victim of the troll attack is left with asking themselves, "How do I both protect myself, my ideas and convictions while balancing my emotional reaction, and somehow walk away from the trolls who only want a fight and to get everyone riled up in the first place?"
Problem is, the trolls tend to use tactics that often creates problems within the community. Fred, for example, has only one goal in his attacks. His tactics are all designed to disrupt, and he admittedly thinks that his disruptions are nothing less than hilarious. I pointed this out to many, and battled him often before finally banning him from the chat room of my Political Pistachio Radio Show, and blocking him indefinitely in other chat rooms so that even if he is present, I cannot see what he is typing. One of my listeners told me on my instant messenger after one such battle between Fred and I that she didn't understand why I was such an ass to him. After all, he was only asking legitimate questions, and all I had to do was answer them honestly. Well, remember that Fred's questions, like most troll's questions, are not really questions, but are actually statements designed to create havoc. Anyway, weeks later that same person contacted me and told me that I had been correct from the start about Fred. Fred is a sick individual that will stop at nothing (and I mean nothing) to get a laugh at other's expense.
One tactic that trolls use, which Tom and Fred are both quite inept at, is to try to use bloggers against each other. Tom's latest attempt at this is having convinced Jennifer over at Conservative Chic with his one-sided (he posts what I say, but adds commentary that is in a very different direction of the context) and malicious posts that I am somehow cowardly because I don't put up with his garbage and have finally gone back to moderation just to keep him off my blog. Divide and conquer, right Tom? Pretty childish of you, to be honest. I thought you'd have a little more maturity than that.
That is how trolls play the game, and they are especially dangerous around newer bloggers or commenters (or commenters that are inherently passive and trusting). Newer commenters and bloggers tend to side with the troll, willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, especially when the old hands attempt to slap down the troll out of frustration. The more experienced, or less trusting, bloggers often know the history of the troll, and have often decided to take a stand to defend their community and hunt the troll until they've left the community or blog, or they simply ignore the troll altogether. Newer people, not knowing that the troll may be currently presenting the mask of the maligned victim in order to garner support and thus keep the battle going on longer, may openly side with the troll in an effort to defend their new community or blog from bullies. In the end, however, like my friend's dealings with Fred, the trusting blogger or commenter gets burned, or finally realizes that he or she has been had. By then, the damage is done, and the situation has gone way beyond the level of debate.
I realize that the term, troll, can be highly subjective. What some readers may characterize as trolling may be to others a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. I understand that a simple opposing position may not necessarily be trolling - hence the reason I have not gotten rid of my argumentative commenter on my townhall blog, Caday5. I realize that I cannot always recognize a writer's motives. But, most controversial posts attract strong responses from those unfamiliar with the robust dialogue found in some online comment sections.
Unfortunately, sometimes I am not very skilled at using the most effective way to discourage a troll, which is to ignore him or her, because responding as I am here more often than not encourages a true troll to continue disruptive posts — hence the often-seen warning "Please do not feed the troll".
Frequently, someone who has been labelled a troll by a group may seek to redeem their reputation by discrediting their opponents, as does Tom. No matter how even-handed ... how just ... we try to be, the fact of the matter is, we are not perfect. We snap. We jump to conclusions. We get tired and cranky. But what separates us from the trolls is that we are able to step back and re-evaluate our behaviour. I try to learn from my mistakes, to learn when to stop reacting, and simply walk away from what I feel is trollish behavior.
Trolls seem to intrinsically need to be understood, which can make it difficult to walk away from that chance at communication, and possibly teaching the troll a bit about the truth. But some battles are won only when they aren't fought at all.
In the end, I prefer conversations with my buddy Sam - but, being the person that I am, I cannot let a few nasty nuggets by Tom the Neurotic Liberal to go unanswered, so watch for (in the near future) my response to posts (I will provide the links when I respond since he cries so much that I don't give him his due credit) called "Inherintly Dishonest," "Say What?" "A Giant Strawman," and the one that begins, "Doug bitched me out for posting a comment on his blog. . ."
No comments:
Post a Comment