New Post
Search
Help[Opinions] I see nothing trollish here /nt
in reply to a message by Chrisell
.
Archived Thread - replies disabled
1
Replies
Really? Nothing?
This makes me doubt your judgement. :)
This makes me doubt your judgement. :)
1
Re:ally
This post is just an opinion question. It may have been posted by a couple of rather silly little girls, or it may have been posted by one silly little girl -- who, by the way, would hardly be the only silly little girl to appear on this board, and frankly far from the silliest. Either way, it's just an opinion question. Chrisell had her snotty hissysnit, sniping at other unquestionably legitimate posters, under the one post of Jinger&Joleen that was relatively innocent and inoffensive.
When I posted this I hadn't yet seen the other J&J posts, but now that I have, they don't change my mind. This one is still no big; and I don't think I should have to read an entire day's posts, verifying that all new posters are acceptable to Chrisell or any other self-important self-appointed board cop, before I answer one.
And let's call a spade a spade: if the best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them, Chrisell totally undermined that strategy. Her repetitive snark drew attention to and lengthened the supposedly offensive thread -- the opposite of her purported intention.
This post is just an opinion question. It may have been posted by a couple of rather silly little girls, or it may have been posted by one silly little girl -- who, by the way, would hardly be the only silly little girl to appear on this board, and frankly far from the silliest. Either way, it's just an opinion question. Chrisell had her snotty hissysnit, sniping at other unquestionably legitimate posters, under the one post of Jinger&Joleen that was relatively innocent and inoffensive.
When I posted this I hadn't yet seen the other J&J posts, but now that I have, they don't change my mind. This one is still no big; and I don't think I should have to read an entire day's posts, verifying that all new posters are acceptable to Chrisell or any other self-important self-appointed board cop, before I answer one.
And let's call a spade a spade: if the best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them, Chrisell totally undermined that strategy. Her repetitive snark drew attention to and lengthened the supposedly offensive thread -- the opposite of her purported intention.
1
In this post alone?
I certainly see nothing trollish, unless it is assumed from the outset that Jinger and Joleen are merely the fabrication of a single poster. And I question the judgment of anyone who makes that leap. :/
I certainly see nothing trollish, unless it is assumed from the outset that Jinger and Joleen are merely the fabrication of a single poster. And I question the judgment of anyone who makes that leap. :/
1
Well, not only that but their names, the fact that one doesn't want to write, just all of it together is a bit on the weird side. I wouldn't say it is outright trollish but it definately would keep me alert on future posts.
1
True. I'm just bothered because I don't think it's the sort of content that merits a slap on the wrist for responding to it.
ETA: In fact, I think it's rather rude to be dishing out slaps on the wrist for responding to anything, really, regardless of content, but that's another story.
ETA: In fact, I think it's rather rude to be dishing out slaps on the wrist for responding to anything, really, regardless of content, but that's another story.
This message was edited 1/24/2009, 4:12 PM
1
No, I agree
I think slaps on the wrist are wrong. That being said, I think it is also wrong to respond to known trolls, which only leads to the troll making more posts about equally trollish subjects.
I think slaps on the wrist are wrong. That being said, I think it is also wrong to respond to known trolls, which only leads to the troll making more posts about equally trollish subjects.
1
Well, but this poster was unmistakeably a the troll in the past and this post is a bit dodgy with the whole twin business. I think it's normal that, if someone has a history of trolling, it takes a little while for her to be accepted as a bona fide poster.
1
Yes, but...
To call a few posts made about half-an-hour before this post "a history" is a bit of a stretch, IMO. To find anything verifiably trollish about this poster, one has to investigate her posting history. Lillian said that she didn't find anything trollish "here," and neither did I. Dodgy, sure, but if you're going to say that someone is a troll, you need a bit more than dodginess to back that accusation up. And I don't see why anyone should be expected to look outside of this thread to find this evidence for themselves. That is the accuser's burden.
To call a few posts made about half-an-hour before this post "a history" is a bit of a stretch, IMO. To find anything verifiably trollish about this poster, one has to investigate her posting history. Lillian said that she didn't find anything trollish "here," and neither did I. Dodgy, sure, but if you're going to say that someone is a troll, you need a bit more than dodginess to back that accusation up. And I don't see why anyone should be expected to look outside of this thread to find this evidence for themselves. That is the accuser's burden.
This message was edited 1/25/2009, 1:31 PM
1