"Shocking" Science of Shitcock

User avatar
sei
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:29 pm

"Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby sei » Fri Feb 14, 2014 8:13 pm

Image

User avatar
Thad
Posts: 5961
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:05 am
Location: 1611 Uranus Avenue
Contact:

Re: "Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby Thad » Mon Feb 17, 2014 12:47 am



The first problem I can see with this study:
Okay, so you've got someone who has admitted to being a troll.
You then proceed to take their subsequent answers at face value instead of assuming they're just intentionally selecting the most provocative response.

Second problem: vagueness of language.

I have sent people to shock websites for the lulz.

and
I enjoy griefing other players in multiplayer games.


Define your terms. How many of us, at some point or another, have given someone a link to something horrible? Goatse and Tubgirl used to be all the rage. What about my "Hi, I'm a stupid cunt who likes to leech images" graphic? Does that count as "shock website"? It's certainly intentionally rude and offensive.

And what's your definition of griefing, anyway? There were people who thought the stuff we used to do in City of Heroes was griefing. Or that story Sharkey told of tricking FF11 newbs into thinking there was a Float spell by exploiting a graphics bug. Is that griefing?

Third problem:

The more beautiful and pure a thing is, the more satisfying it is to corrupt.


Okay, fucking seriously? If someone asked me that question I'd feel obligated to answer "Yes" just because it is just such a pure bullshit question. That's, like, fucking comic book supervillain dialogue. Who comes up with this shit?

So yeah trolls are annoying and it's tempting to assume all the most horrible things we can about them. But I'm pretty damn skeptical about this study. There's a pretty broad gulf between being a jackass on the Internet and being an actual bona fide sadist.

And for the record, no, I don't actually think Guild is a sociopath.

User avatar
Brentai
Woah Dangsaurus
Posts: 2200
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 2:40 pm

Re: "Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby Brentai » Mon Feb 17, 2014 2:02 am

Further proof that there's not much difference between a comic book villain and myself in the bedroom.

User avatar
zaratustra
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:45 pm

Re: "Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby zaratustra » Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:49 am

But if you assume a troll tries to game the system for attention, what would they do when the attention is specifically on them?

User avatar
Mongrel
Posts: 10302
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:28 pm
Location: Canadumb

Re: "Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby Mongrel » Mon Feb 17, 2014 11:45 am

Bask.
Image

User avatar
Thad
Posts: 5961
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2014 10:05 am
Location: 1611 Uranus Avenue
Contact:

Re: "Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby Thad » Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:51 pm

zaratustra wrote:But if you assume a troll tries to game the system for attention, what would they do when the attention is specifically on them?


Accuse everyone who calls them a troll of being the REAL troll, of course.

User avatar
sei
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:29 pm

Re: "Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby sei » Wed Oct 08, 2014 4:15 am

Trouble at the Kool-Aid Point wrote:But the Koolaid-Point-driven attacks are usually started by (speculating, educated guess here, not an actual psychologist, etc) sociopaths. They’re doing it out of pure malice, “for the lulz.” And those doing it for the lulz are masters at manipulating public perception. Master trolls can build an online army out of the well-intended, by appealing to The Cause
Image

User avatar
Mongrel
Posts: 10302
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:28 pm
Location: Canadumb

Re: "Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby Mongrel » Wed Oct 08, 2014 11:45 am

She has very correctly identified internet-only fame as a no-win situation.
Image

User avatar
sei
Posts: 949
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 6:29 pm

Re: "Shocking" Science of Shitcock

Postby sei » Mon Oct 13, 2014 9:21 pm

Eh, you need to get fame despite people adamantly believing something of yours is shit.

From the hater’s POV, you (the Koolaid server) do not “deserve” that attention. You are “stealing” an audience. From their angry, frustrated point of view, the idea that others listen to you is insanity.


Then again, I suppose there's usually at least the one person...
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests