|
|
Posted by Derek Janssen on 05/24/07 18:29
6forPizza wrote:
>>
>>>You know, I have been on Usenet since 1994 and this "top posting"
>>>criticism, and the insane level of vitriol attached to it, still
>>>puzzles me. Am I missing something? What the Hell difference does it
>>>make whether someone posts a response at the top or bottom of the text
>>>they're quoting? Unless they're responding to a post on a point-by-
>>>point basis, what difference does it make?
>>>
>>>I do remember, back in the days when even ASCII bandwidth was
>>>precious, people objected to posters quoting the WHOLE previous post.
>>>But this isn't much of an issue anymore. And if you ARE going to quote
>>>the whole previous post, then top-posting would seem logical (since no
>>>one using an older newsreader that doesn't automatically recognize
>>>quoted text would want to have to scroll all the way to the bottom of
>>>a long post just to read your response).
>
>>Also, generally speaking, when a troll starts to sense that he's losing
>>his "core" fanbase and being in danger of shunned, netcopped, or
>>otherwise finally losing his reliable daily meal-ticket, it's usually
>>the same pattern:
>
>>The troll starts "digging in the trenches", getting ready for a long
>>defensive that will focus the attention on *him*, instead of what he
>>hoped were going to be "stealth" posts, and begins fantasizing that he
>>is in fact an invaluable part of the group--
>>He's already convinced himself, and now tries to convince anyone who
>>bothers to talk to him, that he is really the SOLE DEVOTED GUARDIAN to What
>>This Group Is About...And will snap at any "foreign" crossposter,
>>burn-the-witch any off-topic thread, and tell any deviator from format
>>that there's only *one* way we post round these parts, pardner!
>>While, if he's even lucky to get that much attention anymore, maybe one
>>of the other actual posters apologizes to newbies, saying, "Oh, don't
>>pay any attention, he thinks he's a regular..."
>
>>And again, it's any troll will fall back on "Group purity" delusions,
>>but you can always single-out that particular old-old-OLD-skool
>>geriatric 90's-geezer trying to bring back that faraway decade he loved,
>>by his "B-but...he TOP-POSTED, people, everyone always gets mad at that,
>>don't they...nowadays?..."
>
> Don't forget, when proven wrong or shown to be a fool, dodge and evade,
> bob and weave, bullshit, smoke and mirrors, spew excessive hatred
> and change the subject.
"Red-herring" subjects usually, in most sample cases, being changed to:
- Favorite off-topic hobby that was the "comfortable" subject of the
last old-home group the troll habited (in 90's geezer-troll's case,
usually gaming or vintage-computer tech)
- Creative-writing insults out of all possible context, since he was on
a roll, or
- Steering the subject onto some overexposed wacky pop-kitsch headline,
like that Heroes season finale, WTF was up with THAT?? ;)
- Distracting the enemy with nitpicking micro-minutiae traps about any
of the above--The minute the troll asks you to quote, "prove" any
previous posts with quotes, links or Googled excerpts, consider the
thread officially over.
....Publish or perish, publish or perish:
Trolls only exist in online virtual form; the troll who doesn't
constantly remind the world of his very presence is invisible, and the
invisible troll doesn't exist--
A troll is a poster who fights a daily battle against blinking out of
existence.
Derek Janssen
ejanss@comcast.net
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|