Reading the thread about the flagged post, this question came to my mind. It is often difficult to distinguish between them. What do you think about this?
I just want to make it perfectly clear that
nobody called the author of that flagged question a troll.
So if you are using that as an example, it is a false dichotomy. The post in question was flagged not because it was made by a troll, but because it was a question* thought to be one that is likely to start a flame war** (presumably, without the intention of its author). That’s an important difference.
* The official position of the admins on the EndeavourOS forum is that this was not a stupid question, because such a thing, supposedly, does not exist.
** or, perhaps more likely, the flagging was done by a GNOME fanboy who felt personally insulted by the question. This is just my speculation on the matter.
The answer is you can’t always tell immediately. Generally it becomes apparent after prolonged interaction what their intentions are which is why we ought to give people the benefit of the doubt if the situation isn’t crystal clear.
Reading the ominous topic, but completely independent of it, I came up with this question, which has always interested me.
In order to know who is a genuine troll, you would think that it would be necessary to read minds, because it is the intention that makes a troll.
Usually, however, it is completely clear from the user’s actions, which often cause disruption. It is difficult to codify it, and has to be dealt with on a case by case basis, but in most cases, it’s very obvious when one is a troll.
What is, perhaps, more dangerous than genuine trolls is labelling people trolls willy-nilly as that can cause considerable disruption (in fact, trolls often project and call other users trolls). It is not an accusation that should be made lightly.
I think of something similar about this. I think it is often difficult to decide this issue.
On a non-professional forum, it has already happened to me that some people looked like trolls, even though I only described my honest opinion. others liked my posts. So classifying this is not always easy.
I doubt there are many trolls on Linux distro forums
Trolls usually try to make people mad. So if you feel like punching someone after reading their post, it might be a troll
There are many people who delight in posing impossible and deliberately misleading questions just to see the train-wreck that ensues. That’s a different sort of malicious.
I’ve already seen someone just politely respond to comments, while others put it in obscene words, yet he was called a troll, which they took seriously
So if someone is genuinely curious about the reactions of others but is unaware that it is impossible to answer his questions, is he a troll?
No, that makes them a help vampire.
I haven’t heard that name yet, but it’s apt. In addition to energy vampire, I have to note this as well.
4 more years…!
What a piece of s*hhh.
Help vampires are not trolls in the sense they have no intention to cause any disruption for their amusement, but they can be just as annoying.
They are selfish, lazy people who want solutions to their problems served to them and cannot be bothered to put in any effort into finding a solution. But somehow, they can invest almost infinite effort into asking questions.
& lazy people that want spoon feeding make me . Troll I just laugh coz they sad and need attention.
That how I feel
( hope I not upset anyone )
I also hope I don’t become a troll because of the question.
Help vampires are often in a symbiotic relationship with solution w***es, people who want to inflate their solution counts or hunt badges. When these two find each other, what ensues is utterly obscene…
An example that you do not have to write to everyone separately.
This will only blow out the topic unnecessarily.
I thought we were forgetting a category: the spammers!