| Free speech is not a license for intimidation tactics. When a "troll" crosses the line from being vicious and unpleasant to threatening personal safety do not hesitate to take legal action. |
"Trolling entails luring others into pointless and time-consuming discussions. The name derives from the practice used in fishing where a baited line is dragged behind a boat (Oxford English Dictionary, 1992), although some Internet discourse refers to the troll as a fictional monster waiting under the bridge to snare innocent bystanders. Trolling often starts with a message that is "intentionally incorrect but not overly controversial." In this respect, trolling contrasts with flaming, which is "[a]n electronic mail or Usenet news message intended to insult, provoke or rebuke, or the act of sending such a message"(Free Online Dictionary of Computing, 1998). Trolling further differs from flaming in that the goal of flame bait is to incite any and all readers, whereas the goal of a troll is to draw in particularly naïve or vulnerable readers. Catching inexperienced users or "newbies" is a commonly stated aim of trollers (Andrew, 1996; Donath, 1999). As one Internet user, Andrew, states on his web site dedicated to trolling, "The object of recreational trolling is to sit back and laugh at all those gullible idiots that will believe *anything*" (Andrew, 1996). In practice, however, trolling and flaming often merge, in that in both cases, there is intent to disrupt the on-going conversation, and both can lead to extended aggravated argument."
From :
http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/archive/CSI/WP/WP02-03B.htmlBut there is another type of troll that primarily visits political forums, who is more akin to the "internet stalker", but is very careful to "blend" with other trolls until they have a target. Like the common troll they appear to start fights for no real purpose. But unlike the common troll, ignoring them does not make them go away. They may be quiet for a brief time, but they return as soon as the subject comes back around to their interest. They are impervious to logic, are experts at disingenuous argument, know no shame, and will go out of their way to target individuals outside of the forum in question, going so far as to call for them to be hunted down as enemies of free speech.
Examining the traits of this troll species, one might conclude we are dealing with a kind of sociopath; they do excel at the "pity play" when they find themselves banned, the "pity play" when confronted is a known trademark of the sociopath. But it is hard to image pure chance accounting for the sheer numbers, persistence and density of these individuals in highly controversial political forums.
Known disruptive individuals who focus on politically controversial areas:
Keith Bridgeman, variety of sock puppets; focus, Parkinson's disease, atomic bombings
"Superdude" focus, National Politics
"Killtown", focus, noplanes/911
"Kent", focus, women's issues
Following is part of a case study involving Kent:
"The trolling incident occurred on a web-based discussion forum sponsored by a large-circulation feminist magazine published in the United States. The purpose of the discussion forum is to provide a space for dialogue advancing feminist concerns and issues. The forum has over 4,000 members, of whom about 200 participate actively. In the discussion analyzed in this paper, 41 individuals participated, 90% of them female and 10% of them male. Participants sometimes disagree on individual interpretations of feminist ideology and action, but generally share an agreement that women are politically disadvantaged compared to men, and that feminism is the best way to address this problem.
In early February of 2000, this agreement was challenged from two different sources. Several gun rights advocates from another forum joined the feminist forum exclusively to advocate against gun control legislation, starting more than a dozen new threads to argue their point of view. During the same period, a new male participant, Kent, started posting messages that were intentionally antagonistic to the core values of the forum. In his introduction to the forum, Kent identified himself as a middle-aged man in a professional position that involved overseas travel. He claimed to have been previously removed from other feminist forums for his views, and he also claimed he would eventually be removed from this feminist forum. He described himself as openly hostile to feminism, and started attacking forum members in dozens of posts spread throughout the forum.
Over a period of eight days alone, more than 80 posts were written to a thread discussing Kent's participation in that thread. Partly as a result of this discussion, the forum administrators adopted a new policy for participating in the forum (see Appendix A). Kent was eventually banned from the forum as a result of the new policy."
This more serious type of trolls ups the ante, crossing into legal territory by stalking, threats, calling for people to be hunted down and revealing others' personal information, or, just as bad, revealing a completely unrelated person's information in the mistaken belief they are the troll's target.
Why would a person take the risk of breaking the law just to get back at someone on-line? They may believe they are protected by their Internet anonymity. Perhaps they believe that no one will take the trouble to pursue charges with the authorities. Filing a suit is more trouble than most people are willing to go through over what seems to them a simple political disagreement. Instead they are more likely to leave the forum or at least stop posting.
Was this the goal of the stalker troll all along?
It seems "out there" to most rational people that anyone would go to the trouble to hire people with the express purpose of driving people away from participation in on-line political discussions. But there is a solid precedent for this speculation:
In July of 2007 a story was posted at Daily Kos about rent-a-trolls:
"Rent a Trolls!!! They've Got F&^%ing Rent a Trolls?
by LunkHead
Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 07:07:24 AM PDT
For this campaign season, it looks like someone is offering the services of trolls and sock puppets for hire. "
This was in the run up for the election, but it would not be a stretch to think that a corporation or lobbying firm could take advantage of such services to spread their message. Or frustrate grass roots opposition to their message.
The "jury is out" as they say, but the combination of traditional trolling sociopathic traits(especially the "pity play") combined with targeting individuals for harassment, invasion of privacy, and threats, forces one to consider that some stalker trolls are part of an organized intentional plan to drive people out of online political participation.
____________________________________________________________
Note: The "pity play" is described in "The Sociopath Next Door" as the calculated attempt of a sociopath to evade responsibility by claiming they are the hurt and injured party when confronted about their actions. This manifests in the stalker troll when, in spite of meticulous documentation of their misbehavior, they claim to be the target of a "censorship" or "hate campaign". At no point do they accept any responsibility for their part in the situation.
References:
Keith Bridgeman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TOJO"Superdude"
http://www.politicsforumpoliticalworld.com/member-feedback/11566-banned.html"Killtown"
http://www.911blogger.com/node/12116"Kent"
http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/archive/CSI/WP/WP02-03B.htmlReferencing "illegal trolling"
http://fixunix.com/linux/347144-re-trolls-censorship.htmlMiscellaneous
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/17/9137/01266 http://www.flayme.com/stalker/spiro.shtmlBloggers Beware: Libel and Invasion of Privacy
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/04/18/043121.php________________________________________________________________________
This article is the result of on going research into the activities of a political stalker troll. Feel free to email me about your own stories of being stalked online(email harassment, calls to "hunt you down", invasions or attempted invasions of privacy) as a direct result of your online political participation:
tambro12@gmail.comIf you find yourself the target of illegal attacks from a "troll" online, including but not limited to threats to your physical safety, demands to reveal your personal information, especially when they do not, calls for stalking, document everything and do not hesitate to contact any of the following, urging them to take prompt appropriate action:
the site administrator/owner
your local police department
an attorney
a computer consultant to check your security
Free speech is not a license for intimidation tactics.
No comments:
Post a Comment