Can someone tell me how_not_to be a Troll?

[kenthomson799]

Hey!
I just recently read the forum's user-agreement and dissented with some of the clauses so made a post about it (it is lying somewhere in the forum if you want to find it, i don't want to link it for fear of being called "A Attention Seeking Troll"). The post was well received by the community and a few helpful members also tried to help me understand how this whole forum is setup, but i had bigger/bad-er questions and so the thread ended up being closed as i was found to be "almost trolling".
This has happened to me in two IRC-channels too! (Including this there is only one other irc channel that i have ever visited in my net-life). People often have told me that i am probably trolling. Now the point is i never really wanted to be a troll i simply had a different view and posted it so that i can see what other's think and than form a more informed view. But that always somehow ended up the wrong way.
-->I have read about trolls in matthew's signature, wikipedia, aysiu's posts, etc and i find that:
1. When i post about something i disagree with
1.1 I am seeking attention, that is why i posted--I want to know what others think
1.2 I actually have a different view
1.3 I sincerely believe in that different view (so I would defend it and not accept anything others say until it is concrete/sufficient to let me disbelieve what i currently believe)
All these things somehow turn out to be troll-spotting techniques--does that mean I am a natural/genetic troll?
Remember i don't spam, attack people, talk roughly, am overly argumentative, am not deliberately hostile and insulting, shout, etc. I came to know about flames and flamebait after being called a troll. I simply talk in a natural way and somehow it ends up being called trolling. (that does not hint that i am naturally rude / antisocial)
When i talk about Opinion A i will usually defer from the general opinion, so some forum members will tell me about Opinion B and why they believe it to be true, so I will tell them why i think Opinion B is flawed due to certain reasons, and other forum members will tell me why Opinion A is flawed, Now the point is...If people tell me why my opinion is wrong it is perceived that they are speaking for the whole community / are obviously right / standing in solidarity with the whole community but when I tell them what they believe could be flawed I am simply suspected to be a troll.
So my question is what should i do to not be a troll? Any suggestions?

[N8K99]

perhaps instead of expressing opinions about philosophy, answers to questions which can have a technical solution need to be sought, yet even this strategy can be employed by those who are unwilling to learn, and thus doomed to live beneath bridges, and growing hair on their toes. please, remain teachable- for there is always someone out there who has more knowledge than you do- at least that is how i approach it.

[kenthomson799]

perhaps instead of expressing opinions about philosophy, answers to questions which can have a technical solution need to be sought, yet even this strategy can be employed by those who are unwilling to learn, and thus doomed to live beneath bridges, and growing hair on their toes. please, remain teachable- for there is always someone out there who has more knowledge than you do- at least that is how i approach it.
I really don't understand how this_actually_relates to my question.
Anyways, I really am teachable, you see as nor do I have much experience about Linux and nor do i think i know a lot, so--I have got no option but to remain teachable. I am generally welcoming of people who want to teach me something. But here we are not talking about my receptiveness to teaching, but a difference of opinions, and the thing that follows.

[yabbadabbadont]

I read completely through the thread in question. In my opinion, you were being a troll. I have myself, on occasion, had serious philosophical disagreements with the way the forums are sometimes moderated. However, I've never claimed that the owner of this site doesn't have the right to do with it as he pleases. (no matter how much it might upset me at times) Sometimes we, as adults, must just agree to disagree about things and let it go. To continue arguing past that point would, I believe, be considered by most people as trolling.

[kenthomson799]

I read completely through the thread in question. In my opinion, you were being a troll. I have myself, on occasion, had serious philosophical disagreements with the way the forums are sometimes moderated. However, I've never claimed that the owner of this site doesn't have the right to do with it as he pleases. (no matter how much it might upset me at times) Sometimes we, as adults, must just agree to disagree about things and let it go. To continue arguing past that point would, I believe, be considered by most people as trolling.
I too never claimed that the owner has no right to his own property. What i was saying is that the GNU essentially is about de-centralized power and having a owner is itself fallacious (but i really don't know how without a owner something could have started, but than i was hinting towards a change-able, electable owner or something of that sort). Never mind, i really don't want to attract more attention to that thread.

[kerry_s]

Uhm, stop trolling? ;) Just kidding. the biggest part of the forum is getting and giving help with ubuntu/linux, try and stay with getting or giving helpful solutions. I also noticed that there is increased posts that are just totaly useless jabber, which bury people who are actually looking for help with something. If you try and stay with the purpose of the forum, which is helping or getting help, you will not be seen as a troll.

If it's not about ubuntu or linux in general or some kind of hardware compatiabilty thing, then it should not be on the forum. (my personal thought)

[yabbadabbadont]

But GNU doesn't really have anything to do with the operation of the forums and it's rules. (even if it is the main topic of conversation ;)) These forums are pretty much a benevolent dictatorship. Take it or leave it. :D

[kenthomson799]

If you try and stay with the purpose of the forum, which is helping or getting help, you will not be seen as a troll. That was quite a effective statement in itself but on a sidenote.
I am, here talking about the discussions in cafe/backyard wherein I am having a difference of opinion with the majority and am yet willing to defend it upto a point that someone with a really sorted belief system comes up and contradicts whatever i have said (with reason) and a clear new broader belief emerges.

[kenthomson799]

But GNU doesn't really have anything to do with the operation of the forums and it's rules. (even if it is the main topic of conversation ;)) These forums are pretty much a benevolent dictatorship. Take it or leave it. :D
I was just trying to fit the ideology of GNU on everything else. And i happened to read the forum user-agreement on that day, so i naturally tried to apply it there too. I too have got no problems with a benevolent dictator, but i was trying to think of various scenarious and a probability of a bigger disruption in case of such a setting

[diatribe]

It does not help that you have the arrogant manner of a troll. Your posts in this thread alone smack of an air of superiority, and I'm sure you will hear this alot. Although I am also trolling right now, but just tone yourself down , lurk some more to understand how people act here, and then you should be fine.

[kenthomson799]

It does not help that you have the arrogant manner of a troll. Your posts in this thread alone smack of an air of superiority, and I'm sure you will hear this alot. Although I am also trolling right now, but just tone yourself down , lurk some more to understand how people act here, and then you should be fine.
Fighting fire with fire?
Alright so something in my manner oozes superiority? That's news, i never noticed. I shall try and tone myself down in the future and act in a little more what-is-the-word manner. Thank you, that genuinely helped.

[yabbadabbadont]

I was just trying to fit the ideology of GNU on everything else. And i happened to read the forum user-agreement on that day, so i naturally tried to apply it there too. I too have got no problems with a benevolent dictator, but i was trying to think of various scenarious and a probability of a bigger disruption in case of such a setting

OK, with that explanation, your posts in the other thread would be (less) trollish. It's never a good idea to continue to argue, even politely, with the moderators once they have clearly made up their minds though. It's a good way to get yourself booted. ;)

[kenthomson799]

OK, with that explanation, your posts in the other thread would be (less) trollish. It's never a good idea to continue to argue, even politely, with the moderators once they have clearly made up their minds though. It's a good way to get yourself booted. ;)
Boiling down whatever you say to the most crudest form;
Mods making a guest-appearance in my thread means i gottu stop arguing? Does that mean if users were let alone to fight it out among themselves there would be a more productive discussion?
I know, i know, i am over simplifying your statements--just ignore them if you think they are fallacious.

[KiwiNZ]

The rules and code of conduct for this forum is not covert. We are open with them. When you join we ask you to abide by them .

The best way to avoid problems is to ...... abide by the rules. Simple really.

The rules are designed to make this a place that is a pleasant visit for those who come.

[yabbadabbadont]

Mods making a guest-appearance in my thread means i gottu stop arguing?

Not necessarily. It depends on whether the moderator is posting a personal opinion, or clarifying the "Official" position. Generally, if the moderator is just posting his personal opinion on a topic not related to the running of the forums, they will not moderate that thread. However, the thread in question was about the interpretation of the forum rules, so posts by a moderator there must be assumed to be clarification of the official position. If ever you are in doubt about a post by a moderator, send them a private message asking for clarification on how they are posting. i.e. as a moderator or just another forum user. Then act accordingly based on their answer.

Edit: Doh! Too slow. :lol:

[eentonig]

Reading your last post, I had to smile.

I'm a moderator myself, allthough on another forum. And with that last post, I clearly had five or six usernames from that forum jumping to my mind. They too never know when to quit.

Your problem is that you like to argue for the sake of argueing (arguing?). I too can enjoy a good discussion. Even if I know up front that both parties will never get to be on the same line. But, there's a good place and time for everything.

And a 'technical' and supporting community is not the place to do just this. People will enter discussion, but they will not do it for the sake of the discussion, but to defend their idea. If you then keep pushing their limits and attacking their idea from different angles, you'll be considered trolling.

If you do want to keep on argueing, I suggest you seek for a good political or philosophical forum. They will apreciate this skill more.

[kenthomson799]

If you then keep pushing their limits and attacking their idea from different angles, you'll be considered trolling.Alright no attacking from different angles from now on. Does contradicting a idea by putting it in different scenarios sound like attacking it from different angles? Does it mean trolling?

[kenthomson799]

If ever you are in doubt about a post by a moderator, send them a private message asking for clarification on how they are posting. i.e. as a moderator or just another forum user. Then act accordingly based on their answer.That's a really nice idea!

[KiwiNZ]

Remember not all Staff members accept PM's and also due to their work loads you may not get an immediate response

[eentonig]

Alright no attacking from different angles from now on. Does contradicting a idea by putting it in different scenarios sound like attacking it from different angles? Does it mean trolling?

It's all in the eye of the beholder. Isn't it?

I don't think I would consider it as trolling. At least, as long as it's obvious that the different scenario is plausible, in function of the discussion, shows that you are open for the other idea (doesn't mean you have to agree with it. But you're considering it.) and not just for the sake of it. But others might disagree on that.



I used to have long discussion with my father. I always felt like the looser afterwards. But it was a joy to enter a discussion with him.
He learned me that, to have a good discussion, you need a few things.
1.) A goal: You want to convince the other party about your idea/opinion. If you do not have that goal, don't start the discussion.

2.) Get to know your opponent. How can you convince someone your idea is better, if you don't know what their idea is? And more so. How can you convince someone, if you don't know what they value. A porsche might be the fastest and best car in the world. 95 year old granny wont be too impressed with the specs since she'll be hardly able to get in that low piece of ....

3.) If you get upset, you probably misinterpreted a comment. Ask the originator for clarification or rephrasing. (90% of all fight have there origin in this point)

4.) The other party is always right!!!!!! Maybe you don't think so. But they do! So don't say "you're wrong, you're stupid. I don't agree. etc..." Agree that he has a valid point, or at the least that you know that he finds this a valid point. And then counter him by asking him if he considered this or that flaw. Or better, ask him to explain how he sees this or that detail you think is an open issue. And propose alternatives to consider.

5.) Speak for yourself. "This is stupid." has a whole different ring to it then "I personally think this to be stupid."

[kenthomson799]

Remember not all Staff members accept PM's and also due to their work loads you may not get an immediate response
I shall take that into consideration before getting restless next-time.

[kenthomson799]

or at the least that you know that he finds this a valid point. And then counter him by asking him if he considered this or that flaw. Or better, ask him to explain how he sees this or that detail you think is an open issue. And propose alternatives to consider. Now this is something one always forgets when he has so much emotional investment in a particular opinion/point-of-view. Thank you for clarifying that out. I really would like you to thank you for taking the time to list out all those 5 points. They certainly are invaluable when one is in a heated debate finding all contradictions with the others opinion and all correct-ness in one's own, it is at that time that one needs to pause and remember what all you have said here.