After reading the 'Troll Slaying the E-Z way thread' (no hyperlink, it's at the top of the stckied topics goddammit!) I began to wonder - what, really, is the harm in trolls?
Before you raise your arms, consider this:
Spammers: People who post the same tired message over and over again. See: The _oo__oo_ troll
Advertising Bots: Bots that create accounts simply to robotically advertise a product. See: most comments in a Cracked article.
Flamers: Face it, you've done it. You've flamed someone before, thus you have at one point been a flamer. See: you, at least once.
Now, let's look at the most common definition of a troll. Bear in mind this is trolls on The Escapist:
Troll: Someone who posts a topic with obvious intent to cause outrage.
Now, considering most trolls limit themselves to posting topics, (that is, they don't hack) what is the harm in responding? Or, more importantly, what is the point of calling anyone with a slightly outlandish opinion a troll? Because the way I see it, it's just another was of provoking discussion. They're not flaming anyone in particular (See 'Flamers', also 'You, at least once') and it is just another way to begin a discussion about a certain topic. In many ways, it's better - once you have a viewpoint you are strongly opposed to, it is easier to argue against it.
So, my question is this: what is the harm in troll topic-starters?
Bonus question: why are people so quick to call people with a strong opinion about something a troll?
Before you raise your arms, consider this:
Spammers: People who post the same tired message over and over again. See: The _oo__oo_ troll
Advertising Bots: Bots that create accounts simply to robotically advertise a product. See: most comments in a Cracked article.
Flamers: Face it, you've done it. You've flamed someone before, thus you have at one point been a flamer. See: you, at least once.
Now, let's look at the most common definition of a troll. Bear in mind this is trolls on The Escapist:
Troll: Someone who posts a topic with obvious intent to cause outrage.
Now, considering most trolls limit themselves to posting topics, (that is, they don't hack) what is the harm in responding? Or, more importantly, what is the point of calling anyone with a slightly outlandish opinion a troll? Because the way I see it, it's just another was of provoking discussion. They're not flaming anyone in particular (See 'Flamers', also 'You, at least once') and it is just another way to begin a discussion about a certain topic. In many ways, it's better - once you have a viewpoint you are strongly opposed to, it is easier to argue against it.
So, my question is this: what is the harm in troll topic-starters?
Bonus question: why are people so quick to call people with a strong opinion about something a troll?
