Does Equipment Matter: Pro vs. Pro

[Baal]

That definition sucks Baal. Tell you why: It's the definitions that trolls and tyrants use in order to call normal people trolls.
It's entirely subjective who sows discord or starts quarrels or whatever. This is why most of the time if a conservative nowdays writes some conservative viewpoint on a leftist board he's immediately called a troll and banned, for example.


The best definition is what I said, which is, when someone posts out of topic, and most especially, when someone posts about another poster instead of about the topic being discussed.
In my opinion, if someone starts discussing the character of someone else rather than the topic of discussion, they should get a warning and then a ban. But that's just me.

You make a good point. But I still think your definition is not quite inclusive enough. Also, people can go off-topic without intending to sow discord. I guess it comes down to intent, but it is hard to know someone's intent when they are anonymous on the internet. For all we know some posters are very intelligent Golden Retrievers.

 

[Lightzy]

You make a good point. But I still think your definition is not quite inclusive enough. Also, people can go off-topic without intending to sow discord. I guess it comes down to intent, but it is hard to know someone's intent when they are anonymous on the internet. For all we know some posters are very intelligent Golden Retrievers.

Yeah. Never called anyone a troll really, unless they called me a troll first.
Don't see the point. Usually I really enjoy the humor, and a deliberate troll I cannot call a troll, they're more an artistic performance
I seriously enjoy some high level troll shows

 

[berndtjgmann]

(Baal) You make a good point. But I still think your definition is not quite inclusive enough. Also, people can go off top without intending to sow discord. I guess it comes down to intent, but it is hard to know someone's intent when they are anonymous on the internet. For all we know some posters are very intelligent Golden Retrievers.

(Lightly). Yeah. Never called anyone a troll, unless they called me a troll first.
Don't see the point. Usually I really enjoy the humor, and a deliberate troll I cannot call a troll, they're more an artistic performance.
I seriously enjoy some high level troll shows

I happen to be a reasonably intelligent fifty percent Pomeranian, fifty percent Irish Setter. The Pomeranian is quite definitely Dark Tetrad in a good natured way, the Irish Setter Myles Na Gcopaleen whimsical and sarcastic.

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Here is the standard definition (from Wikipedia):

In Internet slang, a troll (/troʊl, trɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[SUP][1][/SUP] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[SUP][2][/SUP] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[SUP][3][/SUP] often for the troll's amusement.

Here are some others I have found in various places:

An Internet troll is someone who comes into a discussion and posts comments designed to upset or disrupt the conversation. Often, in fact, it seems like there is no real purpose behind their comments except to upset everyone else involved.

An Internet Troll is a colloquial expression used to define an online user who uses Information and Communications Technology (ICT) to purposely and actively provoke, defame, anger, tease, flame, or incite other online users. More often than not, the Internet Troll does not know the target recipient(s) of their vitriolic statements and behaviors. Internet Trolls regularly appear in all forms of online mediums ranging from online video gaming gatherings to chatroom and forum discussions.

They come in many types, including for example the Agenda Troll:
“Agenda trolls are those participants who join a forum specifically to pursue an agenda of their own, often a feud or grudge with another member, or perhaps a dispute with some party not participating in that forum. When a flame war erupts on another board, for example, Agenda Trolls will follow their opponents to other forums in order to continue the spat.”

That definition sucks Baal. Tell you why: It's the definitions that trolls and tyrants use in order to call normal people trolls.
It's entirely subjective who sows discord or starts quarrels or whatever. This is why most of the time if a conservative nowdays writes some conservative viewpoint on a leftist board he's immediately called a troll and banned, for example.


The best definition is what I said, which is, when someone posts out of topic, and most especially, when someone posts about another poster instead of about the topic being discussed.
In my opinion, if someone starts discussing the character of someone else rather than the topic of discussion, they should get a warning and then a ban. But that's just me.

You make a good point. But I still think your definition is not quite inclusive enough. Also, people can go off-topic without intending to sow discord. I guess it comes down to intent, but it is hard to know someone's intent when they are anonymous on the internet. For all we know some posters are very intelligent Golden Retrievers.

Baal, do you really think the definitions you posted of what an internet troll actually is do suck, and that Lightzy is making a good point?

I do think there are varied levels of internet troll. I don't think all trolling is bad. The original use of the word, as I am given to understand was referring to what you do when you are fishing while the boat is moving at a certain pace so that the bait on the hook mirrors the swimming of a fish: trolling. Trolling for newbies was originally how the term was used. A member of a forum who had been on the forum for a long time would ask a leading question. Any of the more experienced forum members would know the person was asking for a response rather than because he did not already know the answer. The more experienced members would get that the person asking knew the answer. And the purpose was to get newer members to the forum to respond and be interested. So, that version of trolling isn't actually a bad thing. It was just to lead and lure people into responding more. To make the forum more active.

But pretending that certain people don't post to try and get a response of anger or upset from other people seems a little naive as well. Sometimes a person doesn't even realize he is exhibiting trolling behavior. But the pernicious trolls are doing it because when other people get angry and upset, they get a kick out of it.

Whether Lightzy agrees or not, there are internet trolls. Sometimes the word is thrown around when perhaps it should not be used. Sometimes people are called trolls and they were not trolling. But there are times when it is worth knowing what trolling behavior is. Like if Lightzy had said, "I don't really know if I like your definition Baal," it would have had a very different effect than: "That definition sucks Baal."

Now, I am comfortable saying that there are plenty of times when I do things to get a response from someone. My general reason for that wouldn't be to hurt people or make them upset or confused. But I am okay saying that sometimes I do low level trolling. But when all someone does is trolling and their purpose is more about trying to derail a conversation or upset people, there are times when the person who is doing that no longer has a place on the forum.

 

[Baal]

I do think the point that whether something is trolling does depend in some cases on context. Lightzy gave an example.

I don't think the definitions I provided suck (I certainly didn't invent them). And I do think his was very inadequate. But some is in the eye of the beholder. That part of what he wrote I accept.

Carl, we agree that a lot depends on intent. And given that research shows that a lot of trolls have dark tetrad personality traits, we agree that often the intent is bad.

And when somebody attempts to derail almost EVERY thread they wander into, with the same tropes, you have to call it like you see it (as we both do, in similar ways). It takes a pattern over time. Usually one post alone is not enough. Some people have managed to amass quite a portfollio. (And some are adding to it, clearly unable to learn from previous experience).

There was one yesterday at MyTT that stayed up for an hour or so before it got reported and led to the rare instant perma-ban it was so appalling. That is the extreme exception.

 

[Raylazyfo]

But I really do mean it bjgmann: can you, in your own words, explain to me 3 good reasons why you are a valuable member of the forum? Or how you can change and become a valuable member of the forum?

I am laying this in your hands. Will you choose to turn it into a mess and an argument. Or are there good reasons for you to participate in the forum?

Is there anyone else on the forum who would like to help me see some value in what he has offered thus far?


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

Alright, I feel that you are being too harsh here. Nobody said when signing up to this forum that you had to be a "productive" or "valuable" member of it. When reading your posts, it sounds like you are firing him from a job for essentially having a different opinion to you, when so far he hasn't actually done anything on this forum to warrant being banned.

 

[langel]

I think that the "troll" feeling about Berndt are based on two reasons: first - his statements are fixed on a century-back reality, and second - he defends himself against the modern understandings of contemporary reality. This forum is aimed to help players with the recent game problems, and such "back to those days" references may look strange and awkward.
So I don't think that Berndt should be classified as a "troll", though at some angles he seems to be, its just that his statements look awkward for the mood of this forum.

 

[zeio]

There is, unfortunately, little visual evidence and not much written documentation of regulation and practices during the era when hard rubber rackets were the choice of competitors from league and club competitors to internationals. It has been a while, but I have myself read both the sources you cite from Boggan's compendium and Ms. Cioroslan.

Re the sources you cite regarding light colored clothing, deformation of ball when executing a finger-spin service, usage of shiny balls, serving behind the end line (of the table) and within (imaginary extension) of side lines, racket not light colored or shiny (the oft mentioned [by me] Rule 4) and light colored clothing (against Barna in 1949, Reisman told me that he wore a navy blue shirt with a USTTA patch on the left side and grey gabardine trousers), Barna a dark-colored shirt and (probably) grey trousers as well, "vertically" deleted from the service law, and warning for hidden services or services of doubtful legality, could you please give the names of the sources from which you derived this information?

Sol Schiff and Jimmy McClure were possibly the two foremost exponents of finger- and knucklespin services. After taking their own sweet time, first the USTTA then the ITTF banned them. Other internationals did not use them, possibly (I don't know, and they're all dead) because they couldn't execute them effectively or considered them unsportsmanlike (IMO rightly; while a product of human ingenuity, they threatened to make a mockery out of tt).

Were the internationals of the hard rubber eras of the '30s and mid-'40s to 'mid-'50s to a man and woman always saintly in their behavior? No, and I have never written that they were. But the sport, though then as you cite and as I have cited poorly served and poorly regulated by its parent organization was fairer, better balanced and at least as sportsman- and sportswomanlike if not more so than it is today. That illegal serving goes on, despite very seldom being called by qualified umpires whose purpose, among other purposes, is to do just that, is not deniable. That international level players and some amateurs boost their rubbers with various brands of boosting oils, some of those rubbers already factory boosted, is also undeniable.

The source is from the ITTF site, in a piece by Colin Clemett. Look it up. It's fun to read.

I don't know about fairness. Like you wrote, there is hardly any sufficient video footage to make any reasonably objective assessment of how exactly the rules were enforced back then. Though, just from the case where the word "vertically" was deleted suggests they had as much trouble regulating and enforcing the rule(s) then. Also, the way it took multiple changes, particularly "the toss" which was so drastic that the serve motion was entirely different, indicates the players from the old days were "just as noble" as those are today.

 

[NextLevel]

Alright, I feel that you are being too harsh here. Nobody said when signing up to this forum that you had to be a "productive" or "valuable" member of it. When reading your posts, it sounds like you are firing him from a job for essentially having a different opinion to you, when so far he hasn't actually done anything on this forum to warrant being banned.

Maybe the reason he hasn't done anything to warrant being banned in your opinion is that a lot of his stuff that was intended to replicate what he did at mytt and other forums was moderated?

I have seen people who some members would like to hear from not post on forums because they didn't like the tone of a forum. It's something that I think anyone who takes a forum seriously should keep in mind. A forum like this one is not about fairness as much as it is about being a community for certain kinds of TT enthusiasts. Why you would like to encourage someone to post who continually insults the game we all play and watch puzzles me.

It is clear that this forum is for fans of modern table tennis. Why insult the modern game repeatedly here other than to troll?

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Maybe the reason he hasn't done anything to warrant being banned in your opinion is that a lot of his stuff that was intended to replicate what he did at mytt and other forums was moderated?

I have seen people who some members would like to hear from not post on forums because they didn't like the tone of a forum. It's something that I think anyone who takes a forum seriously should keep in mind. A forum like this one is not about fairness as much as it is about being a community for certain kinds of TT enthusiasts. Why you would like to encourage someone to post who continually insults the game we all play and watch puzzles me.

It is clear that this forum is for fans of modern table tennis. Why insult the modern game repeatedly here other than to troll?

Thanks NextLevel. This is an important post. It is worth thinking about what NextLevel has said. And most of you have not seen many of the posts that I removed early on when bjgmann first started posting on the forum.

There can be content that makes the forum a much less friendly community. When the majority of a members posts are insults and personal attacks or the member is continually making fun of others and not doing much else, it is worth knowing the TTDaily Moderation Team views and weighs options. But at a certain point certain members earn a ban.

I would like that not to happen to bjgmann. But he is coming close to that. So I tried to get him to act better.

I do think bjgmann has something to offer the forum. I just think, most of the time, he is really trying to entertain himself by insulting people who enjoy modern TT.


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

Can someone provide me with a quote for why Larry Hodges won’t post on TT forums?


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

 

[Baal]

He was in a big flame war with, of all people, AgentHEX. The search function at MyTT is a bit clumsy for me to take the time to find it, plus I would rather not revisit it.

He does occasionally show up at MyTT still. Usually, his comments begin with the sentence "earlier today I wrote on my blog...".

Even before the flame war, though, he was not a frequent visitor, so I think it never really resonated with him.

 

[NextLevel]

He was in a big flame war with, of all people, AgentHEX. The search function at MyTT is a bit clumsy for me to take the time to find it, plus I would rather not revisit it.

He does occasionally show up at MyTT still. Usually, his comments begin with the sentence "earlier today I wrote on my blog...".

Even before the flame war, though, he was not a frequent visitor, so I think it never really resonated with him.

The story is a bit longer than that and has to do with other internet trolls not just Agenthex. But it will take me time to find. He is likely busier now but in general trolls make it hard to function. Some people trivialize this stuff but if they had a stake in creating a thriving forum, they might come to appreciate it better.

 

[NextLevel]

http://www.tabletenniscoaching.com/node/2221

 

[UpSideDownCarl]

http://www.tabletenniscoaching.com/node/2221

Thanks. It is worth people understand stuff like this. And how some of us have kept TTDaily pretty friendly for members.


Sent from The Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy

 

[NDH]

I'll be completely honest and say that I haven't read the entire thread here - Quite frankly, after the first 40 posts, I got the message.

To me, an online forum troll is someone who repeatedly (key word), looks to take things off topic, and generally cause a nuisance.

I have absolutely no doubt that the OP is doing just that - This is a Table Tennis forum of the 21st Century. Not a Hard Bat forum from the 1900's.

I think I've said it before, but if people started posting threads about Federer, Nadal, Wilson Rackets, Slazenger Tennis Balls and the smell of the grass at Wimbledon (spoiler alert, it's delicious), everyone would have an issue.

The fact that this poster repeatedly posts inflammatory content, to provoke other users into arguments, and take away from the sport we are here to discuss, is.... trolling.

Add to the fact he contributes nothing about Table Tennis (it's all Hard Bat related), just solidifies the idea that he should be removed from the forum to allow discussion to flow freely.

I understand this might seem harsh to some - But if you look over all of his posts, you'll see his is a serial offender, with no remorse, and no inclination that he will change or contribute in a positive way.

 

[Suga D]

This is why most of the time if a conservative nowdays writes some conservative viewpoint on a leftist board he's immediately called a troll and banned, for example.

Okay now, this really made me laugh. You think righties are any better?
I will take a little time to show a different perspective how trolls work in Germoney.

In about 95 - 99% of the cases when that described scenario happens, it is ´cause the "conservative" person really is trolling. Plenty times he´s just teasing and provoking, and as soon he gets called out for his bullcrap, he switches roles and starts playing the innocent victim. That behaviour is something between sociopathic and psychopathic. Often he´s not looking for an open and fact based discussion, in fact he just wants to read his opinion on the web and wants his view on things to be the one and only right one. Anyone who is talking back is dumb or worse (like systemslaves, sheeples and so on, you probably know the terms better than i do) So plenty times this is just posted to make people angry and just leads nowhere. I would call that behaviour some serious trolling.
Nothing against a healthy discussion, but unfortunately that is rather rare.
As soon as someone points out that there might be some facts missing that should be taken into consideration, the "discussion" turns into namecalling. Of course when lefties post on a rightwing forum this can happen to. But what i´ve seen is people that pointed out when some "conservatist" posted something racist, they got deleted and blocked from that site.

Now if such behaviour only happens on the web, then most people could live with it, but when a mayor of a large town quits his Job, ´cause his family is receiving death threatenings, like an unused rifle bullet in the mailbox with a note saying: the next one is for you! Then joking time is over and it´s time to react! Simple as that!

Lastly provoking unknown people and enjoy seeing them get mad is very ANTISOCIAL behaviour and IMO absolutely contradictive to what the term "SOCIAL MEDIA" would suggest and hence is completely obsolete on SOCIAL MEDIA!

Just my perspective...




[Emoji2]

 

[Suga D]

http://www.tabletenniscoaching.com/node/2221

This is pretty much the same reason why Werner Schlager doesn´t post anymore on the German forum www.tt-news.de.

Saddening

 

[Lightzy]

Okay now, this really made me laugh. You think righties are any better?

Yes. A research article has been published showing that leftists are three times as likely to unfriend someone on facebook because of differing political views than righties.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybe...servatives-to-unfriend-over-politics-n2261561

 

[Lightzy]

Yes. A research article has been published showing that leftists are three times as likely to unfriend someone on facebook because of differing political views than righties.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybe...servatives-to-unfriend-over-politics-n2261561


Not that I really care one way or the other, but I was making a point related to the subject we were discussing here about the shitty subjective definition of troll as 'someone who I think is saying things which I don't agree with in order to annoy me'