Monday, July 27, 2009

Mad Priest Coverup. Part Two.

Well, what is an "internet troll?" Basically, in my opinion, it is anyone who disagrees strongly with a blog owner. The people who use this term, usually use it when they have no reasonable response to what the "troll"is writing. The Mad Priest crowd think calling someone a troll is all that is needed to emerge triumphant. So let's break it down.

The troll is off topic. My first comment on a blog some three years ago dealt with the topic of evolution. This blog had a very long list of posts he had written over the years. I got no response. Then an experienced 'commenter' responded to me a few weeks later saying I needed to comment on the most recent post. Many bloggers do not check comments on old posts. I did as he suggested and immediately started a discussion that had many comments. So, yes it is true; in order to contact a blogger my son used a current post to ask if the blog might have some answers. There was NO attempt to disrupt the thread.

The troll is usually anonymous or uses a fabricated name. Well, who doesn't. Those who most use the troll term against others almost always hide their identity. For example, many commenters don't even have a listed "profile." Others use names like "IT." What in the helldoes that tell us as to his real identity? I should point out that my son and I have given our real names, our city of residence and even the church we attend.

The troll tries to start arguments. That may be right. I do not comment on recipes for egg salad sandwiches. I do comment when I think the subject is of some importance to me and others. Yes, this may lead to strong responses.

The anti-troll yellers think nothing of deleting scores of comments if they are not right in line with the blog owners ideas. Mad Priest recently posted a thread that had over 80 comments. When I checked the following day he had deleted the comments down to 47---apparently not liking people disagreeing with him.

In sum then, a "troll" is best defined as one who comments in a way the blog owner does not like. His right, of course. But attempting to "win" your argument by labeling someone you disagree with a "troll"really doesn't cut it.

2 comments:

  1. In sum then, a "troll" is best defined as one who comments in a way the blog owner does not like. His right, of course. But attempting to "win" your argument by labeling someone you disagree with a "troll"really doesn't cut it.

    Nor does labeling one a "cafeteria" or "cultural" Catholic, if they do not toe the party line established by the USCCB.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anon., excellent point; well said.

    ReplyDelete