Jump to content

Is there virtue in being a Second Life troll?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1847 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, BilliJo Aldrin said:

'Credible' and 'Daily Mail'? That's an oxymoron. The minute someone cites the Daily Fail in an un-ironic manner is the minute they've lost their argument. That 'news'paper is known in the UK for its anti-everything OUTRAGE!!!!1!1!! You may as well cite The National Enquirer for all the credibility the Mail has.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, belindacarson said:

Really? That gets you wound up? Just mute them, no need to get so wound up.

Oh honey, they were muted - and abuse-reported for good measure - perfectly calmly. They were also banned from that store once the owner found out what they'd done. Their friend told me they were only joking when they accused me of being a perverted kiddy-fiddler. Hahaha!

Do me a solid: next time you are equated with something foul, just have a good hearty chuckle. There's a good girl :)

Edited by Skell Dagger
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, belindacarson said:

Really? That gets you wound up? Just mute them, no need to get so wound up.

One of the characteristic ways in which the "anti-PC" crowd responds to complaints about offensive language is to imply that really it's all about "hurt feelings," with the implication that, if the little snowflakes would just toughen up a bit, shrug, and move on, there'd be no issue.

Except it's not just about "being offended" or feeling "hurt" or "insulted."

Sometimes it's about making spaces enormously unwelcoming and uncomfortable, or even on occasion dangerous, for those perceived as outsiders. This forum has, in the past, sometimes been that kind of space, and I could give you a list of women posters who were literally driven from here by trolling attacks. I've known sims in SL that functioned similarly. Another case in point in RL: I used to live in a neighbourhood with a great many all-male "sports bars." It would seem obvious that a woman would feel uncomfortable or even threatened in a place where you could cut the testosterone with a knife, and yes, I wouldn't go into one. But the habitues would, in nicer weather, spill out onto the sidewalk. And yes, the leering, wolf whistles, and sexually-loaded commentary that greet most women who try to walk by might just "be ignored." Or, I might have walked on the other side of the street. But I shouldn't have to do either.

The other, possibly more important point is that trollish, demeaning, racist, misogynist, or homophobic language doesn't just impact the "feelings" of the person at whom it is directed. It serves to reinforce and perpetuate the kinds of stereotypes that make the position of its victims so precarious, miserable, and even dangerous.

It's not cute, it's not funny, and it's not trivial. It's part of the problem.

Edited by Scylla Rhiadra
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 7
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

Mind you, I grew up wanting to live in the Looney Tunes universe. SL is as close as I think I'm gonna get.

...gets a thoughtful look, then raises her hand into the air, index finger extended, as an exclamation point appears over her head.

...hauls out the "Drop a piano out of the air onto a passerby" device.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Lindal Kidd said:

...gets a thoughtful look, then raises her hand into the air, index finger extended, as an exclamation point appears over her head.

...hauls out the "Drop a piano out of the air onto a passerby" device.

...hauls out the piano slinging trebuchet. 

...sets piano on fire before launching

...watches Maddy's eyes light up

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not even sure if it is possible to troll inworld anymore, what with most of the safe hub of yore being empty and people being quicker to hit the ban hammer than before. Not that I ever wanted to, but I remember eavesdropping on quite a few conversations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/4/2019 at 2:53 PM, Conifer Dada said:

A lot of trolls or griefers are not very good at their 'art' and end up bringing ridicule on themselves, which I suppose is a source of mild entertainment to others.  On another SL forum I recently mentioned how I visited a busy welcome area and decided to turn 'voice' on, for a change, to listen to the conversation (I nearly always have it turned off).  What I heard was mainly  an incoherent abusive argument, with other people making random comments and noises.  While this was disturbing (the abusive chat was overtly racist) I will admit it was entertaining in the same way as people in the 19th century used to pay to visit lunatic asylums for entertainment.

There's a significant lack of self awareness that prevents some people from recognizing the self destructive nature of their own behavior. I've noticed such people often possess an unreasonable level of certainty and fairly binary thinking. That certainty intrigues me. Our brains want it and will find patterns (and the intent we often believe they imply) where none exist to achieve it, and easily succumb to selection bias to support it. The degree to which we are driven to do this varies, and those of us in the upper extremes are more prone to believe in conspiracy theories and/or the paranormal.

Our need for certainty increases when under stress, making it easier to discern in and out-groups and to seek the safety of identification with our kind. If you aren't sure what to think, who do you hang with? We also feel in control if we can ascribe a motive to those forces we see working against us. We become the lookouts on the bridge, able to spot the enemy before anyone else. Curiously, such beliefs can actually reduce autonomy, causing people to take refuge in the belief, rather than addressing the cause of the stress (which admittedly may be beyond our control). Believing we're on the right side, taking a stand against imagined powerful foes, we often do nothing at all, except perpetuate the wrong headed thinking that makes us feel better. You can see potential for a vicious cycle.

I'm not sure how good I am at spotting such people, but I feel more confident when they step into the world of science, where I have some background. It often doesn't take long for their ignorance appear, and for me to separate their method of argumentation from the (lack of) substance of their argument. Once I've done that, I feel more confident (warning!) in my ability to assess their discussions outside my domains of expertise.

My father had a much more succinct way to describe this...

"Often wrong, never in doubt."

There are people who achieve great success this way, but they sure aren't here.

Edited by Madelaine McMasters
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Skell Dagger said:

When it reaches the point that someone else has to change their behaviour just to avoid it, then it's no longer "absolutely hilarious".

People take SL way too seriously? Try having kid avatars calling you a pedophile in open chat, just because you have the word 'gay' in your profile. That sort of accusation can ruin lives.

If your not a pedo and never acted like one what are you so uptight about? I am gay and hang with child avatars without an thought of sex. SL is all about fantasy and fun and people need to loosen their uptights and get their panties out of a bunch.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 3:48 PM, Bree Giffen said:

Trolling is never virtuous. By definition it is a terrible thing. If you are doing something that you yourself consider trolling then you are being evil. People can do both good and evil in life ever constantly drifting between both states. But make no mistake, trolling is bad. Don't pretend you didn't know.

This is incorrect.

 

20 hours ago, lucagrabacr said:

It depends on context, intent and result. Trolling your friends or with them for the laugh where no one is physically or financially harmed, or emotionally distraught, is fine. Trolling other people without being obnoxious and with the knowledge that they would be 100% ok with it is also fine (a'la april fools' jokes kinda trolling)

This is correct.

 

12 hours ago, Ivanova Shostakovich said:

   The title of this thread could actually be edited to read: Is there virtue in being a thief who steals happiness and contentment from others? To me, the answer is obvious.

Trolls don't "steal happiness". Trolls are only effective when you're giving them the reaction they want. They don't "steal" anything- they rely on you giving it to them.

 

11 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Or, I might have walked on the other side of the street. But I shouldn't have to do either.

I shouldn't have to lock my door when I leave my house, but I do it. Because how things are and how they should be will virtually never line up as long as humans have free will. There's always going to be bad people in the world, and we're always going to have to take a few extra steps to protect ourselves.

 

12 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

trollish, demeaning, racist, misogynist, or homophobic

One of these things is not like the others.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gadget Portal said:
13 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

Or, I might have walked on the other side of the street. But I shouldn't have to do either.

I shouldn't have to lock my door when I leave my house, but I do it. Because how things are and how they should be will virtually never line up as long as humans have free will. There's always going to be bad people in the world, and we're always going to have to take a few extra steps to protect ourselves.

I didn't say "I won't have to do either." I said I shouldn't have to do them.

And I'm going to maintain that that is true: even if (as seems more than likely) I have to "take a few extra steps" to protect myself for the rest of my life, I am going to maintain that I shouldn't have to.

I'm really not sure what point it is that you think you are making here. Because there will always be bad people, I really should just suck it up and not complain, or try to make change?

So, by your logic, we in fact shouldn't bother with laws prohibiting breaking and entering, because, well . . . there will always be bad people who will do that?

I am very well aware, Gadget -- quite possibly more than you are, in fact -- how difficult it is to effect changes in social attitude. Doesn't mean I'm not going to try. And change does happen, slowly, painfully, unevenly, and with a great deal of work. God knows that there is no shortage still of homophobia in our culture, but the progress made by the LGBTQ community over the past 50 years is real, tangible, measurable, and important.

And it wouldn't have happened if those who did fight for acceptance and equality had shrugged off the slurs and the hate.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rex Short said:

If your not a pedo and never acted like one what are you so uptight about? I am gay and hang with child avatars without an thought of sex. SL is all about fantasy and fun and people need to loosen their uptights and get their panties out of a bunch.

It feels like you're missing the point of Skell's story. Certainly, your being gay and your platonically hanging with kid avatars are both completely irrelevant (although I'm not sure where they would be relevant, now that I think about it).

Rather, I think an RL analogy would be walking down a busy street and having a bunch of kids suddenly chase after you shouting "STOP! THIEF!!" (only worse, but never mind that). Then, when everybody turns and looks hatefully at you and prepare to give chase, the kids all laugh, high-five each other, and melt back to their street-corner hangout.

So yeah, it's just a joke. And fortunately our hypothetical RL doesn't permit concealed carry, so -- as in SL -- you're still alive and unharmed. But doncha think you'd have some claim to righteous indignation? 

That said, "SL is all about fantasy" as you say, and I think I can imagine some old geezer playing a kid avatar might goof on a gay man with "pedo" as a jest, imagining that this is just how "kids these days" behave. That seems a lot more likely to happen in that geezer's imagination than in real life, and so it might indeed be reasonable to cut him some SLack.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

I didn't say "I won't have to do either." I said I shouldn't have to do them.

And I'm going to maintain that that is true: even if (as seems more than likely) I have to "take a few extra steps" to protect myself for the rest of my life, I am going to maintain that I shouldn't have to.

I'm really not sure what point it is that you think you are making here. Because there will always be bad people, I really should just suck it up and not complain, or try to make change?

So, by your logic, we in fact shouldn't bother with laws prohibiting breaking and entering, because, well . . . there will always be bad people who will do that?

I am very well aware, Gadget -- quite possibly more than you are, in fact -- how difficult it is to effect changes in social attitude. Doesn't mean I'm not going to try. And change does happen, slowly, painfully, unevenly, and with a great deal of work. God knows that there is no shortage still of homophobia in our culture, but the progress made by the LGBTQ community over the past 50 years is real, tangible, measurable, and important.

And it wouldn't have happened if those who did fight for acceptance and equality had shrugged off the slurs and the hate.

"Let's just get rid of all the laws in that case!" is always the bad response I hear whenever it's suggested that we take steps to protect ourselves.

Nobody ever wants to take any responsibility for themselves or their own well being. "Just make more laws, that'll make it so I don't have to open my eyes and look both ways before I cross the street!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Gadget Portal said:
20 hours ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

trollish, demeaning, racist, misogynist, or homophobic

 One of these things is not like the others.

Which one? Quote from something I read: “If you’re a homophobe, you’re not literally afraid of gay people, you’re just an a-hole.” (Wish I had the actual quote.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gadget Portal said:

Nobody ever wants to take any responsibility for themselves or their own well being. "Just make more laws, that'll make it so I don't have to open my eyes and look both ways before I cross the street!"

Gadget, I generally like you for some unknown reason...and that is a feat in itself as for the most part I don't like people with too much of a conservative mindset. But right now I'm wishing there was a law that could glue your mouth shut.
How you could twist Scylla's post in the way you are, quite possibly one of the best single posts on the forum I've seen, is beyond me.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Madelaine McMasters said:

There's a significant lack of self awareness that prevents some people from recognizing the self destructive nature of their own behavior. I've noticed such people often possess an unreasonable level of certainty and fairly binary thinking. That certainty intrigues me. Our brains want it and will find patterns (and the intent we often believe they imply) where none exist to achieve it, and easily succumb to selection bias to support it. The degree to which we are driven to do this varies, and those of us in the upper extremes are more prone to believe in conspiracy theories and/or the paranormal.

Our need for certainty increases when under stress, making it easier to discern in and out-groups and to seek the safety of identification with our kind. If you aren't sure what to think, who do you hang with? We also feel in control if we can ascribe a motive to those forces we see working against us. We become the lookouts on the bridge, able to spot the enemy before anyone else. Curiously, such beliefs can actually reduce autonomy, causing people to take refuge in the belief, rather than addressing the cause of the stress (which admittedly may be beyond our control). Believing we're on the right side, taking a stand against imagined powerful foes, we often do nothing at all, except perpetuate the wrong headed thinking that makes us feel better. You can see potential for a vicious cycle.

I'm not sure how good I am at spotting such people, but I feel more confident when they step into the world of science, where I have some background. It often doesn't take long for their ignorance appear, and for me to separate their method of argumentation from the (lack of) substance of their argument. Once I've done that, I feel more confident (warning!) in my ability to assess their discussions outside my domains of expertise.

My father had a much more succinct way to describe this...

"Often wrong, never in doubt."

There are people who achieve great success this way, but they sure aren't here.

I'm always thinking about this, trying to understand it. What is this "significant lack of awareness" exactly? I was just reading about how experiments have demonstrated that the people you are describing are less able to be introspective, and if you can't examine yourself on a deeper level and understand your feelings, well is there much hope? Is this characteristic a structure of the brain formed at birth or in the womb? Can it be modified via environmental interactions? 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Rex Short said:

If your not a pedo and never acted like one what are you so uptight about?

I'm not a pedo, yet I was actually perma banned last year because someone decided it was needed to report so anyway. (by luck it got reviewed and undone)

Name calling, false reporting, shaming, whatever, if this is done you have all rights to be uptight about it. Its bullying, harassment. And as in my case can have severe consequences. And not just in SL.

 

Edited by Zeta Vandyke
spelling
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I'm always thinking about this, trying to understand it. What is this "significant lack of awareness" exactly? I was just reading about how experiments have demonstrated that the people you are describing are less able to be introspective, and if you can't examine yourself on a deeper level and understand your feelings, well is there much hope? Is this characteristic a structure of the brain formed at birth or in the womb? Can it be modified via environmental interactions? 

Oy, as you know, this is a terribly complex subject, Luna. The deeper you look, the more you'll realize that our minds don't work the way we think they do. We're full of biases and misperceptions, and our brains are actually fairly lazy. It takes some conscious effort to improve upon this, and our capability to do so varies, as with every other aspect of personhood.

I'm not aware of any research into the teachability of self awareness. We develop some degree of that naturally. By 18 months of age, we can distinguish between our reflection in a mirror and our own bodies, and we notice that our babbling can manipulate others (which would not be so if we all shared the same thoughts). Empathy arises along this same developmental line, and we all wander along that line at different rates and arrive at different end points.

There is a sort of bootstrap effect in the acquisition of self awareness. You need at least some self awareness to know there is even a self to be aware of. The more you have of that naturally, the easier it'll be to layer on more awareness through self education. Thinking is work and the brain wants to do as little as possible. Given the challenges of everyday living, not everyone has the luxury of excess time and energy to expend on introspection. So, by dint of ability and opportunity, there will be a wide variation in self awareness in the human population, and a wide variation in the ability to increase it. But we can increase self awareness by practicing mindfulness and creating environments to foster it, so there's certainly room for hope.

Once again I'll recommend Daniel Kahneman's marvelous book "Thinking Fast and Slow" (and once again I'll thank Pamela Galli for recommending it to me) as a primer on just how much we misunderstand ourselves, how biased our thinking really is, and how we may actually have more than one self to be aware of (the experiencing self, and the remembering self). And for a weekly deep dive into the individual candied bits of our mental fruitcake, I recommend the Kahneman inspired NPR show "Hidden Brain". I've mentioned before that we often see patterns where none exist. Kahneman and Hidden Brain are all about real and unseen patterns that drive us.

A cousin of mine recently married, adding to my extended family a marvelous young woman who teaches yoga and meditation. She's the black sheep of her family of doctors and lawyers and is easily the most engaging mind in her family. I look forward to chatting with her during family gatherings far into the future. We're both digging in the same sandbox and it's fun to compare the things we find, ever aware there are cats around.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 1847 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...