I know I'm a little late for the bandwagon here...

[faeshale]

...which renders my opinions perhaps that much more personal?

Let me begin with this simple statement.

There is no justification for the actions of any of these people.

"Trolling" is the purview of half-assed misanthropists, losers who couldn't hack it (pardon the pun) in the world of flesh and blood and unable to reconcile themselves with the

Comments

[aureantes]

I think it's undeniable that the standards of literacy, intelligence and civil behaviour have gone way way down because of (generally) indiscriminate Internet access. Not that there should be discrimination of access, of course, but that it logically puts a greater responsibility onto online communities (at least the ones who are trying to retain the virtues of civilization) to provide a balance between intolerance of any/all audible dissent and laissez-faire "let the loudest/rudest win" -- where the lack of fair regulation/mediation often drives intelligent people to seek conversation elsewhere rather than have to deal with constant heckling. Either extreme is wrong for a community, I think, and between individuals in their own respect I'd think that the most decent behaviour is to not mess with others nor (unsolicitedly) criticize them to their faces unless it is clear that their attitudes/mindsets/theories/etc. are actually both fucked-up and destructive to their lives. Which is rather more explicitly Hippocratic than many people tend to be online, or even to think about......

But anyhow -- the above, and also that those who do have official jurisdiction over online access and enforcing laws/policies really need to be more comprehensive and responsive when it comes to dealing with the sort of abusive+harassing behaviours that should not be tolerated online or offline "IRL." Seeing as this is "real world" as well in terms of interpersonal cause and effect, it should be treated no less seriously in that regard.

[aureantes]

I don't know who that is, and I'm fairly certain that my viewpoint is unlikely to be the same as his, if he has (as mentioned somewhere above) actually managed to have a class-action lawsuit leveled against him. Controversial as I may be, I simply can't compare.

I think that people have a right to choose their own social spaces, whether online or off, and to not be subjected to people following them around and/or entering into groupspaces specifically and only to be argumentative. In the offline world, that's what restraining orders are for, and I think that private citizens have every right to defend themselves and seek legal recourse against online abuse and harassment.

My main experience of online trolls comes from online communities. Some groups maintain too much administrative control over content and conflict of views (which I have a problem with), and others are too indiscriminate in the level of verbal conflict/attack that they allow without mediation (which I also have a problem with). Neither extreme is socially responsible.

If people are not even 'asking for' conflict by getting vocal in a forum they know to be hostile to their views, then I see no reason to criticize them for using a groupspace to its intended purpose. Nor do I think that there is any logical requirement for a group's admins to give "equal time" to troll/skeptic members who harass and heckle the other members. They can't expect people to not be pissed off at those who are undermining what they had thought to be a (reasonably) safe space in which to socialize and share their experiences/thoughts/whatever. That constitutes severe negligence of management, not to mention a considerable betrayal of the natural group membership.

So.....no. Whatever our respective opinions of people's intelligence these days may be, I still make a point of ignoring the idiots unless they're in the same space as me and are actively making fools and/or nuisances of themselves. If they're not deliberately putting themselves out to try to impress/awe others, then I don't see the point of 'cutting them down to size' -- their actual 'size' is not for me to know absolutely nor define.

Plus, as an owner of multiple online groups, I know better then to let people in whose primary discernible intent is to harass or to proselytize existing members simply for being themselves. Along with all other spammers, they are excluded from serious personal consideration.